Reader “dave crockett” brought up an interesting point in response to my post about the way Jerry Manuel and Dan Warthen handled John Maine’s recent injury. He wrote:
I’m no Jerry apologist, but he’s become a caricature on the interwebs. No hyperbole is completely out of hand. No need for context when it comes to Jerry’s monkeyshines. When he subscribes to the same worn out, cliched, debunked “book” that supposedly good managers also still use it’s evidence of “Jerryball”.
This to me is a prime example…
Jerry and Dan *clearly* could have and should have been the bigger men in this situation — no question. But Ted, you don’t think this incident has anything to do with Maine blasting Jerry in the press on multiple days after being removed from his last start? Maine didn’t burn *any* bridges with the act he put on, even after it was clear he was hurt?
I replied:
I’d probably just let it go if it didn’t reflect a pattern. Remember that Warthen suggested the Mets’ catchers were responsible for the team-wide inability to throw strikes last season, and Manuel had his whole thing with Ryan Church.I don’t know the nature of Manuel’s relationship with any of his players, and the players do seem to enjoy playing for him. But talk to just about any player or ex-player about what makes for a good manager, and he’ll stress the importance of the manager having his back publicly. Bobby Valentine got a lot of heat for having a big ego — rightfully so, maybe — but he generally did a great job of putting players’ mistakes on his own shoulders.
Manuel has a way of subtly divorcing himself from many of the things that go wrong in a game — instead of “we were sending him,” it was, “he has a green light,” etc. He’s very likely being honest, but he rarely seems to step out of his way to take heat for a player’s error.
dave crockett responded:
My larger point is that I think we — I’m lumping myself in this category — have a classic perceptual bias. We’ve become so hypersensitive to JerOmar’s (many legitimate) faults we can’t acknowledge positive steps. The Maine situation was handled about as differently from Church or even Beltran as possible, but rhetorically people are connecting those three instances rather than separating them.
For the record, I wish we had a better manager. It’s just that manager is really hard to significantly upgrade. The woods are full of guys like Jerry. They may not come with a bunting fetish, but it’ll be something else. Almost the most you can expect is for them to be thoughtful about and responsive to their mistakes. Slowly and uncertainly maybe that’s beginning to happen.
I’m not ready to excuse Manuel or Warthen for the things they said about Maine’s injury after the fact. But I do think dave crockett makes a good point: It does seem like Manuel and Minaya are frequently crucified on the Internet for typical behavior of men in their positions.
And it seems like, in certain situations, Manuel would be torched no matter what he did. I was surprised he brought Jon Niese back out on Wednesday night after the rain delay and lengthy inning, but also surprised by the amount of negative reaction it prompted.
Disagreeing with managerial decisions is a big part of being a baseball fan, and I’m certain that fans of every Major League team quibble with the choices their manager makes. But are we too hard on Jerry Manuel for what we perceive to be mistakes? Do we ignore the correct decisions he makes? Should we point instead to this season’s positive results?
I don’t know. I’ll still contend that he bunts too often and overworks his relievers, no matter what anyone tells me. But at the same time, I think dave crockett is right that I’d be saying something similar about any manager leading the Mets.
Tedquarters 
There are some fair points here. I think it’s unreasonable to criticize Jerry for not using Frankie in the 7th inning or to start the 8th because no manager would do that.
But Jerry consistently makes decisions (GMJ over Pagan, bunting with his No. 3 hitter, batting his best hitter 5th) that defy explanation. And he often gets a free pass from most media members because he smiles or cracks a joke or because he reads MLK/Ghandi.
And the way he has treated Maine all year has been despicable. I’m sorry, but earlier in the year Maine made some comment like “I don’t care if I have to throw lefty, I want to pitch.” You know, the kind of thing that usually gets you labeled a gamer. Jerry responded with “He might have better stuff lefty.”
How is that different than the disgraceful way he treated Church?
The common theme here though, between Maine and Church last year is that that both began to whine and complain, when thier play was not backing it up. and not warranting it.
All the Church stuff went down around late may last year if I am correct right? Church last year was whining and complaining about not playing every single day, but at the end of may had exactly 8 RBI through the first 2 months. He was slugging, yes slugging, .352 at that point, and he was complaining that Jerry sat him down once in a while against lefties?
And Maine this year, kept going out there with absolutley nothing, a mid 80’s fastball, at best, walking the ballpark, then has the nerve to whine and complain and take shots at Jerry when Jerry is reluctant to leave him out there or continue to pitch him?
I’m sorry but neither of these guys had thetrack record to warrant then getting the benefit of the doubt here. I think Jerry doesnt like whiners, which is the common thread here between Church and Maine.
But this is something that Jerry has done with players back to his White Sox days, famously getting on Frank Thomas’ case when he had a foot injury. Track record or no, Jerry sure seems to hate his injured players.
And what track record does Jerry have as a successful manager?
He has a manager of the year award sitting on his mantle, what do you have?
You’ll have to forgive me for not taking an award seriously that’s voted on by people like Jon Heyman and has been won by Dusty Baker three times
Wow, Chris M, you really went with the Rob Dibble/Sean Salisbury line of argument?
Great point Ted. I think everybody though questions the home team’s manager’s decisions. And being in New York the criticisms are magnified.
But I have never been in the group that criticizes Omar. I think he needed time to do what he has and he has done a great job to me. Not to say a perfect job; all general managers make mistakes. But a pretty good one.
I think complaining about your players in public is just not something you want a manager to do. Consider the times you have worked for someone who publically embarrassed you. Even if it is deserved, it is not appreciated. I am sure there are people who will argue that it helped straighten them out. But in that case, is it because the supervisor knew this was the right time to do that? Or, was it just coincidence and public humiliation was the standard techinique?
It does not seem to be used to carefully on the Mets. However, I am not sure why players still like playing for Maneul? Is it because he only embarrasses players who are not well liked by the team? If so, then that shows a lack of character.
What bothers me most about the post is a story I had not heard, that Warthen was blaming the catchers for the lack of strikes last year. This is damning. If it is true, then the Mets should have brought up some of the minor league catchers who can’t hit but are supposedly strong in defense. Or, they should have traded for someone. If that is the problem, giving up any hitting ability is worth it. On the other hand, if that is not the problem (and I suspect it was not) then that reflects very poorly on the coach.
Sorry I missed this.
And yes, it’s really dave crockett. Because I just know you were wondering.