"Ken Macha, 2006": A Horror Story, Written And Produced By Billy Beane

This is such a logical and well researched piece of writing. I remember thinking when Macha was re-hired that it didn't sound like Beane was excited to have Macha there, but I figured it was no big deal because the story kind of faded away...until this week.

Billy Beane is great, but he does make mistakes. Of course, we all do. It almost makes me like the A's more, because they're not perfect; rather, they're a collection of real people who have emotions and sometimes they mess up.

You give Beane too much credit.  Joe Torre is another manager with a vocal and critical boss and it doesn't appear he lets that get in the way.

BB and the A's are much better served with a manager who is respected by management and given real authority, so that he can command respect from the players.

In case anyone missed the article:

http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=FA0A16FE3E540C778CDDA90994DE404482

I'm totally cool with performance scouting rather than speculative scouting, but anyone who's watched enough A's games knows that Ken Macha has the bad face.  Don Juan Matus would have called it "Bad Tonal."  Wavy Gravy would have called it "Bad freakin' vibes, dude!"

Ron Washington has the good face.  He's also got the double whammy.  Hiring him will put a strong leader on the field, yet one who knows that he has to follow the organizational plan, or his arse is grass.  Hiring him will also keep him away from Texas.  Texas with Washington managing is a playoff contender, and we do not want Texas to be a playoff contender!

More important, I just don't believe that it was Billy's job to talk up Macha -- or give him a raise -- in order to convince the players that he was really great. The whole point of the Moneyball approach is that players (and managers) have a certain, measurable value, and that they shouldn't be paid more than they're worth. In fact, for the A's to win, Beane needs to pay players less than they're really worth. And the limitations of Oakland's budget mean that a lot of times we end up with players who are just "good enough," if that. We all know this. Jay Payton is good enough to start for the A's, but there are thirty outfielders in the majors (at least) that would give us more production than he would. Marco Scutaro certainly isn't good enough to be an everyday major-league shortstop, but we play him because we need to. These guys are professionals. They know what people's real skills are and aren't. Beane didn't sabotage Macha. He didn't slam him in the press. He just acknowledged what was true: given our other choices, he was good enough to manage this team at the time. Macha and the A's are professionals. That should have been enough for them (and given the way Oakland played this year, I suspect that for most of them, it was).

Did these guys discount him after the whole blow up last winter?  I doubt it.  Did Macha have trouble getting over it?  Maybe.  I think we can all relate to being in a job and not being happy.  To be fair, none of us has to do press conferences and public things like that and can find ways to hide during those times.  Not so much so when you manage/coach a major sports team.

I was surprised to hear about the firing, but the articles that followed made it pretty clear that Beane did what had to be done.  Any corporate middle manager that lost his subordinates like Macha did would be dismissed as well, although probably not with the kind of golden parachute Macha got.

Will he get another chance?  Maybe.  I see it more likely he will get a shot in Japan before he gets a shot in MLB again.  He might be best served with a year away from the game to reflect.  He was never as good or as bad as has been said, and I wish him luck.

scroll down to the ninth (9) comment and read what Marty Lurie has to say . . .

So what are the poor A's to do?

Compare the A's organization - manager, coaches, and GM - to Tigger. Which one is more functional, better at what it does, more efficient at exploiting the talent (in a good way), and more a winner. Tigger's successful organization isn't a fluke, the same guys did the same thing for Florida. So what does that tell you about success in this era of baseball? Lots of people think teams are built in the free agency era by the GM, so he's all-important. Clearly, he's a big part of the machine, but he's not the only part.

You also need people who can coax the best performance out of the roster you've got, day-by-day. This is where the A's under Billy Beane fall short. It appears that Beane is too much of a clubhouse meddler, but when you have passive manager like Macha who likes to just sit back and watch what happens (like another fan in the stands) somebody has to step up and absorb the clubhouse chemistry and get involved in the day-to-day, inning-by-inning drama of the season.

The best thing for the A's would be to have a manager who is more hands-on than Macha, more in touch with the players, and more intuitive about who's about to break out and have a big game and who isn't. That kind of manager may not be able to work with Beane, if he's as much a control freak as people say he is.

But the bottom line is that it take more than a great GM or a great manager or a rich owner to build a quality ball club - it takes a complete organization from top to bottom, including an adequate payroll, a great set of coaches, a decent trainer, as well as a talented and motivated roster. The A's haven't put all these elements together during the Beane era, even though they've had some talent that ranges from good to great.

I figger we're not going to see World Series rings in Oakland until these organizational shortcomings are addressed, but getting rid of Macha was a step in the right direction.

Now let's get a manager who Billy trusts enough to back off and let him do the job, a set of coaches (especially hitting coach and trainer) that can keep guys healthy and productive, and another 10-20 million in payroll. Then we'll be celebrating in late October.

One of the things I like most about Beane is he doesn't let the grass grow under his feet. When he makes a mistake he tries to fix it. That's why TLong/Redman/Rhodes et al were sent elsewhere while still under contract. I am guessing that he regretted the making re-hiring and instead of suffering through another season of doubt he jettisoned Macha. Constrast this with Sabean who had to realize that Felipe Alou, Benitez, Alfonso et al were mistakes and did little to remedy them.

Macha shouldn't have come back, and when he did, he should have left his resentment back in Pittsburg.

Even so, things would have changed:  the players would have seen another side of him, one that their inexperienced minds probably didn't like.  And then he's no different, perhaps less understanding than before.  Why shouldn't they complain to Beane?  Macha had already made clear to them who was number one.

Beane got an important year of continuity from Macha, and confirmation that he cannot manage in a short series.  Why keep him?  He's peaked.

My guess is they'll eventually offer the job to Dusty Baker who will follow the A's rules (pitch count etc.) because he wants to manage and live in NoCal. BTW, Tony La Russa was Dusty's last MLB manager with the A's in 1986

also... it's the playoffs dummy. you use your bullpen, which is stacked with talent.

at least we got beat by a 3 run homer, not another looked at third strike. that would've been tough.

My God....I'm beginning to wonder if we're seeing the scales tip on the A's franchise, and if this isn't the beginning of the end for this era in the history of the A's franchise.

Stenbrenner's done a lot of crappy things, but I'm not sure that he's EVER called one of his former managers a LIAR in the press.

There was no reason for Beane to cross that line. Let Macha have his say and just keep your mouth shut.

A lot of you are discussing how recent events have turned your opinion of Kotsay.

My opinion of Beane has just taken a dramatic, negative turn.

My perspective on the second guessing of Beane is a little different.  The one constant in the years that the A's have been contenders is Beane.  He is the architect of the A's success.  The managers come and go, and the team keeps on rolling.  The players come and go and still the team keeps on rolling.

And they are a successful franchise, WS win nonwithstanding.  Consistency is the key here people. I will take Beane and his "super ego" anytime over any manager out there.  Eventually, if we keep making the playoffs, we will see a WS trophy hoisted in Oakland...or Fremont.  But not if we don't make the postseason.  And Beane has proven that he is the one that engineers the A's success.  I will give him the benefit of the doubt long before Macha, Howe, or the next manager.

I would like to see Wash get the job, but in my heart I know Geren will.  I can live with that.  I hope Wash is at least promoted to bench coach if he's still around.  

Kotsay embarrassed Beane and the organization with those comments.  Not surprising that he refused to speak with John Shea yesterday (why didn't Macha make his case to Slusser btw).  

So if he poured gas on Beane's situation and embarassed organization headed by two classy owners, which decision makers are now in his corner?