UPDATE: A's fire Macha

to explain about my mouse finger being sore....and he just said "deal with it".

about "team sources"

Macha apparently has problems with outfielders that can't hit (Melhuse, Piatt, Singleton, Kotsay, Payton...).

I heard Zito was Machaing out with some chick last night.

The poor guy is starting to fossilize on the bench, he at least rates a 'Hi, how's it goin', sugarplum?' from Macha.

It's very surprising to see names in there -- Kotsay, Melhuse, and narrowing other members to 'the starting lineup'. Though given the trashy way Macha talks about Melhuse to the media, I'm not surprised that he's willing to put his name out there.

If players really did go to Beane (damn, I'd love to know who), I'd expect to see Macha out the door.

I'm not overly enthusiastic this time, since I actually gained some respect for Macha's managing, but I sure won't be sad to see him go.

another vote for wash.

Now I almost feel bad channeling Macha and having Macha offer Melhuse as a sacrifice to the umpires in the ANtics. It all makes sense!

We're going to hire him again next week?

I'm sure there will be takers, actually. Maybe send Witasick with him! =]

Replacement for Macha... hmm..

Wash?
Geren?
Lach?
Black?

If Macha leaves and is replaced by Ron Washington, we'll know that Billy Beane has finally accepted that "having the right manager" is more integral to the team's success than "Billy Beane's highest comfort level". It's time Beane had trouble coming to terms with someone, rather than someone having to come to terms with Beane.

If Macha leaves and is replaced by Bob Geren, we'll know that there is a generic prototype for "managers Beane is willing to hire," and that we can expect the same-old same-old for years to come.

If Macha stays, it was all a non-story, except that we know now something we didn't know before: that the clubhouse chemistry is not because of Macha, it is somewhat despite him. Nearly 1/4 of the team has been referenced in the complaining.

Since I feel Beane's view of a manager's importance and ideal style has been one of his few glaring weaknesses as a GM, I feel this is a defining moment in his GM tenure with the A's.

Forget what you like, Billy. Forget what you want. The right guy is under your nose and has been for years. Figure it out, now.

I'm sure Ginter and Sauerbeck were on to something with their bickering of Macha's inept communication skills.  But, they were not taken very seriously.

If Kendall, Kotsay & Chavez start complaining about Macha's communications skills, he's gone.  

** And hopefully, Larry Davis and Company will be gone as well.

er, MANAGER!

http://www.benmaller.com/#mlb_rumors_notes

My wife loves him- thinks he a great manager doing the best he can do.  I've always find him annoying- both in his casual attitude toward's winning and his fondness of warming he bench throughout the game instead of pacing around like many of the managers do.  Maybe he'll be looked upon as a good manager after he leaves- if he leaves-  but I can't see a lot of teams jumping to sign him.  Just my opinion.

Personally I'd love to see Wash as the A's manager but...

Wouldn't it be nice to really screw over the Angels and bring over Black?  

anyone care to tally?

lets see, there's...

His extreme dislike of the bench, and thus never using any of his bench players to give players a rest. He likes to play his regulars all the time, regardless. There are times when you HAVE to bench someone, even when they really want to play, and play your bench if not just to keep them healthy and rested for later in the season, and to make your bench ready, or they won't succede when it comes time for them to play! That is one of the reasons why we've failed the two previous years, the entire starting lineup was exausted come september, and the bench wasn't even touched even when players were falling apart.

The same thing happened this year as well, I believe. The only difference is that because of all the injuries, the Bench HAD to be used and thus the players were more rested then they had been previously, only this time they were injured as well.

Just think if the A's HAD sat Chavy down and put him on the DL for two or three weeks when we all wanted him to? Sure, we'd lose above average defense, but we would gain on offense and we would have had a HEALTHY Chavez for the rest of the season and the playoffs, instead of a half dead one.

There is Macha's overuse of Street, using him for consecutive innings when it became clear he couldn't handle it.

Macha's too lax hook when it came to pitchers, instead of taking them out when they were in trouble, letting them give up the big inning before taking them out.

I really do wish we had a manager like Laylend.

On one hand, maybe certain players need to suck it up a little. But, that's hard to say when some people like Kotsay just have chronic back problems that occasionally flare up. The guy's a gamer and gives it everything he's got when he's out there. People like Crosby and Harden need to show they can get over the injury bug or it will plague them their entire careers. Other situations, like what Melhuse talks about - Macha's had that problem in the past.

Aside from all that, I like Macha in the sense that he keeps the team on a pretty even level whether they're winning or losing, but when it comes to adapting to the moment and getting out of some of his tendencies as a manager to stick with certain people longer than he should and have a shorter leash with others, not to mention overusing his best bullpen guys...let's just say I don't think he's a particularly good in-game manager. He has a very good won/loss record, but how much of that is due to the players and how much is due to his decisions?

I would like to see the A's keep and promote Ron Washington. As far as the coaches go, he's the heart and soul of that staff and everyone seems to love him. I just worry he wouldn't fit what Beane appears to prefer in a manager - someone who doesn't rock the boat, at least visibly. I'd like to see someone manage who does more situational things - the hit and runs, more stolen bases when there's a good place for it. Basically the sorts of things the Tigers did in the ALCS. But, there's always been the question of whether or not Beane will let his team play that style. If he won't, it doesn't really matter who they bring in to manage.

who becomes manager.  That's just my suspicion.  He's been a manager before.  He knows how the A's operate and I've seen him interacted with the players.  They love him.

The one thing that I can guarantee is that the players will not be the ones who make this call.  Beane isn't about to be strong-armed into making a decision about the manager based on some players complaining.

I pretty much disregard Kotsay and Payton. Both wanted to play more and not platoon. Well, WAAAAHHHHH. Guess what? They couldn't both play all the time, could they? Kotsay didn't hit lefties all that well this season and needs a lot of rest. Payton never walks and plays a very average LF for someone of his speed and athleticism. So each couldn't play each and every day like they wanted to, because they were at the same positions, and Kielty way outhit both of them against any LHP anyway. That's player-whining, IMO.

What I don't disregard is Melhuse saying, "So I'm a back-up--I'm not important? Just say 'hi' to me." That's huge. I don't disregard players getting upset when they are referred to as "non-entities" when they could just be referred to as "injured--we miss them, but we'll have to win without them, and I think we can."

Ron Washington ALREADY has the respect of these particular players, and he is bright, lively, creative--some of the things one could argue the A's have recently lacked.

Beane already set Macha up to fail by humiliating him with a "you have to take our original offer; you're 'good enough'" approach to taking Macha back. Macha never really stood a chance after that. Now, if the A's want a great manager on their side, instead of against them, and want to keep an incredible infield coach in the organization, Beane needs to make adjustments in his thinking and his ego.

If Wash is offered the job as our manager, I'll feel better about 2007 than I felt about 2006. The organization is now moving forward in a big way, from the top down. If not, we've learned a lot about Billy's one glaring weakness as an otherwise tremendous GM.

To see so much Macha-hating, just days after what was a relatively warm-and-fuzzy end to the season.  Another manager would have gotten the A's past the Tigers?  Really?  I didn't see a lot of moves that we failed to make; I don't buy that we weren't motivated enough because Macha failed to yell, screem or pace; and I don't think that a neglected Melhuse ultimately brought the team down.  

As for Slusser's list of blunt Macha remarks, why would we respond with more than a shrug?  He doesn't tiptoe super-lightly around each player's ego?  Good for him, he shouldn't.  He still sounds to me like a voice of relative calm, a guy who stays on an even keel and thus allows the players to do the same, and a guy who was in charge of the first clubhouse Milton Bradley ever thrived in.  Suddenly, after our guys surpassed expectations and made the ALCS, we want to bring in a more fiery type?  But at the same time, a guy who coddles the injured players more?  Really?  I don't see it.

...than fall to someone waiting at the airport with a hunting knife.

This is more than I even thought was going on behind the scenes. I guess Melhuse had nothing to lose and wants out of Oaktown anyway so he can have a greater role elsewhere, so he spoke his mind.
Unfortunately, everything here gels with Macha's patterns of managing- he only trusts certain guys and leans on them heavily, and barely uses or apparently even acknowledges (judging by this and previous stories too) the "other guys."
In spite of that, I feel bad for him. I think he's a decent guy and is doing his best in a tough position (because of how dominating Beane is, and because of the turnover every year and the major, major injury woes these past couple years too) the only way he knows how.
Does that mean he should stay on, though?
As this little piece (which contains comments I saw in context throughout the year and which are taken way out of context here, by the way) seems to indicate, maybe he'd be happier elsewhere anyway. I think he really wanted that Pittsburgh job last year, but lost out to Jim Tracy. Maybe after the year they had there, he can get that job if he and Oakland do indeed part ways.
If Billy wants Wash, he'd better move things along quickly because Texas is calling...
I like Macha, in spite of the little things we all notice and dislike... but if we can have Wash riding shotgun over this team, I'm all for it.

Errrr...um...I mean...yeah...well...

Shoot.

<shrugs>

Ironic, because I thought Macha did his best work this season, and after looking at other managers, I'm sure we'd rather have Macha than a whole lot of people that I can think of!

That being said, I still think we can do better, and from what I hear, Macha is not terribly well-liked. I do think that matters less than people think, though.

Macha did a good job this year letting the players play their game with very little interference, but he was lacking in the 'let the bench play' aspect.

but is he a good manager? I think there is a big difference in those two roles. I love Wash but I suspect he will not get the job.

... was: Kotsay, WATB. For such a "gamer," he sure does seem to be a dewicate fwowew -- both physically and mentally. And, as Nico pointed out, he's not hit lefties well this year (and in fact isn't really much of a hitter) and needs regular rest -- rest that may not coincide with his back's demands or his own personal interests.

Now, to be sure, Macha may well be an insensitive ass. I don't know.

But this organization seems to have about the most laissez-faire attitude toward players in the majors (with the post-DUIza clubhouse alky ban excepted). The positives of that are the famously easygoing clubhouse and the relatively self-regulating nature of the team. The negatives are that when players aren't happy, there's no clear lines of responsibility/redress/communication -- and players also seem to feel free to pursue their own fitness plans (both inseason and off).

Kotsay and Zito seem to be the only players who have figured out on their own how to manage their own health by pursuing intensive flexibility regimens. (Think about how much time Kotsay would have missed if he didn't.) Kudos to both of them (and any other players we don't know about) for doing so.

I'm 100% speculating here, but perhaps some of the problem with the current kerfuffle has to do with Macha being fed up with certain players not managing their own health successfully -- and allowing that to poison his attitude even toward the players who do yet still have chronic problems (such as Kotsay; maybe Chavez?).

For me, the biggest opportunity for Beane here is to institute an organization-wide emphasis on preventive care and flexibility regimens -- which should be a no-brainer, as it's about the single most cost-effective effort-to-performance move he could make. Why the A's aren't a trailblazer in this area is beyond me.

It seems to me that the A's as an organization don't pay a whole lot of attention to player development beyond the bare bones (pun intended). Wash's sterling rep as in infield coach is certainly well earned -- but he seems to have an awful lot of opportunities to work his magic on undercoached players who reach the parent club. And I think this attitude carries over to health and wellness: basically, players are on their own.

To elevate the speculation (and of course if all I've written so far is wrong, then this will be entirely off-base), Beane may be drawing from his own experience as a player in establishing a system in which only the most Dykstra-esque self-driven strivers can possibly succeed.

Hire Washington.  Lache has managerial experience, but not successful managerial experience.  If you want to pay for experience, then we should be talking to Lou Piniella.

One of the biggest components of Leyland's success is that his team will run through walls for him, and do anything he says without questioning it.  I think of Chavez giving Wash one of his Gold Gloves, and to me, it says he's capable of inspring the same kind of drive in his team.  

that the only way to keep Wash, whom most of us would agree is the most important non-player in the dugout, in Oakland is to give him the job.

If this is true, let's do it.  Billy will just have to "deal with it".  It's time.

Just wondering.  

early 05--Kendall arrives, catches every game, BP and bullpen warm-up.  

10/x/05--Macha leaves.

10/x+1/05--Milhouse goes in and rips him a new one over last year's treatment.  Why not?  He's gone.

10/x+y/05--the return of the Mach.

10/x+y+2/05--Milhouse finally gets off can, flushes bricks and crawls into Macha's office to recant.

various times 06--Badger comes sniffing around.  

9/06--Badger handy with the bat on a few occasions.

11/05-10/16/06--Macha: Milhouse who?  

Texas to interview A's coach Washington, four others
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2628077

"Oakland Athletics third base coach Ron Washington will be the first of at least five candidates interviewed for the Texas Rangers' managerial vacancy."

We knew before the postseason even started that he was on their very short list.

Surpirse move, he really gets cut by the Yankees and A's pick him up for peanuts.

 In a strange twist, A's manager Ken Macha has resigned his post. After careful consideration the A's have announced that a tree branch will be taking over as manager. The management feels that it will be a easy transition since the two have similar management styles, and a similar personality, not to mention tree branch's salary is less than Macha. When asked what changes tree branch would make, he said he would "leave" that to Billy Beane.

on AN since Game 3 of the ALDS

however, has anyone EVER seen Wash get angry or upset? Can he bite the head off an umpire when we need him to?

just said it also

is pretty much the same article (word for word) in this morning's Chronicle...But with stuff like "is owed 2+million on his contract" changed to "was owed..." That's kind of a key difference...

in that article the same sources that told the NY papers that Torre was gone?  I'll believe it when I see it.

I join the ranks of those who didn't really think it would happen, especially not this soon.

Oh well. I might miss hearing Macha's horrible accent and watching his terrible acting in those Hummer commercials with Kotsay, but... oh wait, no, I won't really miss that. Never mind.

ESPN just reported that Macha has been FIRED.

Wash has an interview with the Rangers.

The "Fire Macha Now" crew must be THRILLED.

<pauses a second>

Wait, that's me! Yes, I am! (not as thrilled as I was this time last year, but I'm excited to see where we go from here)

1. What's different about this year compared to last year?  I think Beane already had a good idea of Mach's strategic limitations and difficulty juggling a long bench.
2. We already knew that he didn't get along with everyone. It just doesn't seem plausible to me that Beane would choose Kotsay and Melhuse over Macha and $2M.  Maybe if Harden and Haren said they aren't returning with Mach around, I can see that. Harden's name has already been tossed around the reports.
3. If the A's DO go with Wash, I can see why the speed. But I don't see that's a slam dunk.

...last year's failure to re-up on the economics / this year's firing under the new contract.

This is an affirmative expression of Management's discontent, not a failure to agree--so it's likely to have some staying power.  

I hate that the A's are going to pay him 2 million for NOT managing.  I know they have to but it still stinks.  Nice for Macha though.  Why even manage again?