For example, bringing in a lefty to face a switch hitter who is a better hitter RH would be a -1. If it happened in a 1 run game, it would be -3. Something like that. The outcome of the move shouldn't even be measured. Once the pitch is thrown, it's out of the manager's control. The only thing you can realistically ask for from a manager is to put the right players in the right positions. What they do is left to chance.

Just look at yesterday. When Gordon put a small village of runners on base, what was Manuel to do? Was bringing in Myers there the wrong decision? Would bringing in Mesa have been better? Using Gordon was the wrong move, using Myers probably was the right move, but it didn't work out on the 2nd part, and I don't know if you can blame the manager for his players not executing.

He's butchered third base in general. Nunez should be defense-only, and Helms should be cut now on the spot. Dobbs and Iguchi should play third. That's it.

I'm going to bottom line it here: what the Phils have accomplished this year is nothing short of stunning. Name another team that would stay in contention losing its top three bullpenners for a combined seven months, three of its first four hitters in the batting order for a month each, and send five starting pitchers to the DL.

I doubt any team could overcome that and keep fighting. That's a credit to Charlie Manuel. Does he make an unusual move every now and then? Hell yeah. He doesn't have a whole lot of choices most of the time. And anybody who doesn't understand why Abraham Nunez plays 3B when Moyer pitches needs a primer on the basics of the game.

Ask yourself a question -- how often do I recognize when Manuel makes a successful move?

The answer is likely rarely or never. How often do you recognize a so-called "bad" move? I'd say every single loss. It's typical of fans. You need to understand all the facts before commenting on a move. Because the guys in the Phils' dugout have about 100 years in Major League baseball. For a few fans to anonymously rip their every move that doesn't work out is pretty laughable.

A more educated way to look at it is to look at the team as a whole. The talent level. Then subtract the games and players lost through injury. Come up with an objective expected record for this team. I can gaurentee you it wouldn't be anywhere near 9 games over .500.

Christ, the Phils set a record for pitchers used this year. They lead the league in comeback wins. They've shown a remarkable mental toughness in continuing to bounce back time abnd time again, dating back to the Abreu trade. And I've never seen a baseball team have more injuries than the 2007 Phils. Ever.

The Inquirer noted that Manuel has been managing 15 years and in 14 years, his teams have better second-half records.

It's no surprise that the Phils have always played hard and always played great baseball in the second half.

Manuel should be a strong contender for manager of the year. No question about it. If you understand the game that is.

I do and I don't. What I see are typical fan responses ripping the manager without much thought. In June it was an endless rip job on Manuel for not benching Burrell. Once he proves Manuel correct for continuing to play him, the comments here are of the sarcastic "Charlie had nothing to do with that" variety.

Over the past few years, another typical crusade is the know-it-all "Rollins would be batting third or fifth if Manuel had any brains." Well, Jimmy batted third in an emergency situation earlier this year and batted .260 with less production than normal. He's hitting well over .300 and headed for the MVP at leadoff. Hey, maybe Charlie knows something!

IN fact, the whole notion that Manuel "doesn't put players in position to succeed" is hilarious. Howard won the MVP last year and the Phils have two MVP candidates this year. Victorino, Werth, Rollins and Rowand are having monster career years - none of whom, I might add, are batting where the know-it-alls on this site think they should be.

Charlie has had a lot more success managing the batting order than the pitching staff, but I sense that talent has something to do with that. Still, his move to split Utley and Howard with Burrell for the Mets' series was brilliant - as was the decision to start Ennis Saturday to line up the staff for this week's Mets' series.
Manuel has a fine knack of knowing when to stick with guys and knowing when to go in another direction.

"This is hilarious. You start by saying that a more educated approach would be to do this, but then decline to do so yourself, and guarantee that your guess is correct. I challenge you to take your own suggestion. Keep in mind that some of those games lost to injury were Freddy Garcia, Jon Lieber and Adam Eaton. Maybe the Phillies actually benefitted from injury, eh?"

Did I write a column claiming the Phils have underachieved?? No, I didn't. Somebody else did and I am explaining the educated way to do so. Freddy Garcia has been a horse who won 17 games last year and went 4-0 with a sub-2.00 ERA in September.
Yeah, the Phils benefitted from his loss. Are you kidding me?

"So, it's not Manuel, it's finally getting rid of that bum Abreu? Or maybe it was getting rid of Bell..."

More of the blame game. "That bum" Abreu has been one of the Yankees' hottest hitters as they stormed back into the wild card lead. Honestly, learn the game.

"Why don't they play better in the first half? Shouldn't Manuel be responsible for that as well?"

What is this - you actually make a halfway decent point? A stunning turnaround. Sure, Manuel can rightly be blamed for poor starts. However, championships are won in August, Sept. and Oct. And he deserves a lot more praise for consistently putting a mentally tough team on the field that always plays its best ball when it counts most.

Actually, that's exactly what is stated in the original commentary: "I do know that he is NOT putting his players in the best place to succeed."
It is all just more of the typical Phillies' bash and manager attitude that is tiresome and uninformed. When Francona was here, he was deemed too soft. Bowa came in and was deemed too harsh. Nothing will satisfy Phillies' fans hell-bent on ripping the manager for anything less than a WS ring every year.

"What does Freddy Garcia's September of 2006 have to do with anything? How many wins did the Phillies get from him this year? By getting hurt (or, by finally admitting to being hurt, perhaps), he gave the Phillies the opportunity to replace him with somebody, somebody who might not stink as badly."

Garcia averaged 16-18 wins over the past six years and that is the pitcher the Phils traded for. He took up a monster part of their salary allotment. By being hurt all year, it severely hurt the team and Manuel's options. Nobody here is judging Manuel fairly. In a sense, you are judging him based on a preseason rotation of Hamels, Garcia, Myers, Moyer, Eaton and Lieber - when in reality, what he has is Eaton, Moyer, Durbin, Kendrick, Lohse and a variety of additional castoffs.

What looked great on paper was decimated by injuries and awful pitching. You need to adjust your expectations accordingly.

"Now I know you haven't been reading this blog very carefully. With the exception of a couple commenters, TGP consists of the President, Vice President, Secretary, Treasurer and Parliamentarian of the Bobby Abreu Fan Club -- myself included. You need to recalibrate your sarcasm detector; my point there was that your post seemed to be a slight against Abreu -- else why would you mention him in that context?"

My original point was to mention how the team rebounded incredibly last July/August after Gillick and everyone else assumed they would go in the toilet following the loss of a great all-time offensive player. Not sure how that is slighting Abreu.

"NEWSFLASH: championships are NOT won in August or September. You may have noticed that Manuel's teams the last couple years have come up short of the playoffs, let alone championships, despite strong play in August and September. Why might that be?"

Actually, that's exactly when championships are won. The Phillies have had extraordinarily strong play down the stretch in recent years. Why haven't they won? Well, let me suggest an incredibly novel idea here - other teams were better. Yeah, I don't it's just off-the-wall crazy, but all these other teams? They are trying to win as well. Crazy I know. We tend to think they should just lay down and make way for the Awesome Phillies we all love, but sometimes they don't acquiesce.

The Phillies' biggest problem is their pitching choices just haven't matched their hitting choices. Now I believe some of that is luck. After all, they tried to give Victorino back and the Dodgers didn't want him. Howard was just a 5th round draft pick. The Phils have gotten some luck with their hitters. Pitching is some bad luck, but more poor decision-making. Charlie Manuel can't make Adam Eaton pitch better. Just like he couldn't look into a crystal ball (Or order an MRI) to determine that Garcia was damaged goods. Same with the bullpen - Charlie can't make meatloaf out of grisle.

That's why the Phils haven't won. They have the best manager for the job.

The point is you're comparing the general consensus of the Phillies as "the team to beat" from the offseason. I would say they've suffered more losses than any team in baseball. Yet, Manuel is being picked apart for silly little decisions as though the Phillies should be winning their division by 12 games.

Absent any real hardcore research here, my guess is a legitimate assessment of the 2007 Phillies that takes into account all their injuries would pinpoint their expected record at around .500.

"Once again: championships are not, repeat NOT, won in August and September. You can look it up. You're missing a point about why the Phillies haven't won. Yes, "other teams were better" -- over the ENTIRE season. The reason the strong finishes have not been enough is because the teams were too far back -- due to poor performance earlier in the season. If Manuel is given credit for one, he must take blame for the other."

I'm not missing any point. I said slow early starts are a legitimate criticism. But a team that consistently plays terrific down the stretch is a great attribute in my mind. That's when championships are won. And every manager makes poor moves - often for reasons the typical fan doesn't even know about. For example, Manuel brings in Jose Mesa to face Matt Holiday and Brad Hawpe in a one-run game. To you it makes no sense whatsoever. But suppose - and I'm not saying it's true - that those to Rockies are a combined 4-25 against Mesa in their careers?

To Charlie and Dubee, Mesa's as good an option there as any of their other kerosene-bearing relievers out there.

You don't have access to the tools and imformation he has. Neither do I. Don't drive yourself crazy breaking down every facet of why he used a certain pitcher at a certain time.

I couldn't possibly be qualified to comment on that.

1. As for Abe Nunez. Yes, he should be playing when Moyer pitches. When Lieber pitches. When Kendrick pitches. Helms is not a third baseman. Dobbs is not a third baseman. This team doesn't need offense. That is an easy one.
2. As for Pat Burrell. I don't have any problem taking him our for defense. You play to win games -- not with the expectation that you're going to need a certain player's offense later in the game after your bullpen blows the lead.

3. As for Utley and Howard, why don't you go study how many games the Phils took over early with an offensive explosion against a RH pitcher in large part due to the Utley-Howard attack. The Phils are made to win on offense now and Charlie prefers to load up and attack early. I like that aggressiveness. And truth be told, for the most part, Burrell hasn't been good enough to challenge for a higher spot in the batting order.

Again, you're problem is you want to pick out the minutiae of a game decision to pitch a certain player for use a defensive replacement as some indictment of the guy's managing ability.

Answer my question: Have the Phils -- with 5 starting pitchers hitting the DL, their top 3 relievers spending seven months on the DL and three of their top guys in the lineup missing a month each -- overachieved or underachieved?

If you try and claim this team should have won more games, then you're an even bigger clown than you appear to be.

Obviously Charlie's fault.

Somebody on this team is cursed.