Friday, May 28, 2010

Inside the Mind of John Russell, Part I

Pirates’ manager John Russell does not convey a charismatic presence in the dugout. More accurately, he makes Cleveland (Cigar Store) Indians manager Manny Acta look like Robin Williams on speed by comparison. Fiery leadership does not a successful manager make. Joe Torre is positively placid on the bench.

On the other hand, Joe Torre wins; Russell doesn’t. His teams also have a history of collapsing down the stretch. (I say, “down the stretch” like they were in playoff contention, when Pittsburgh’s idea of a “stretch run” is to climb into fifth place in a six-team division.) True, upper management has a habit of trading every marketable (read: due for a raise) player by the deadline, but still. The newcomers all have something to prove. Show some effort.

My complaints with Russell are twofold: bizarre decisions, and an apparent lack of any sense of leadership. He sits stoically in the dugout, looking for all the world like he’d rather be elsewhere. Some of that is understandable; watching some of the stuff this team does every night could make the Dalai Lama strangle a kitten.

Fielding, baserunning, and concentration errors abound. A recent gaffe against St. Louis showed it’s not just the players who are unfamiliar with the rules, third base coach Tony Beasley isn’t exactly Bill Klem, either. At least some of this has to be laid at the feet of Russell and the coaching staff. He’s been here three years, and the same kinds of mistakes kept getting made.

(An interesting side discussion could be made as to the whereabouts of former infield coach Perry Hill, who walked away from the last year of his contract during the off-season. The team infield defense has regressed dramatically in his absence. No good explanation has been offered as to why Hill chose to take a year off rather than continue in Pittsburgh.)

It’s Russell’s decision-making that defies belief. (I suspect this will become a continuing trope as I watch more game this year.) Last night’s blowout against the Reds had several examples.

The Charlie Morton situation can be set aside for the time being. Why Morton is allowed to continue to get hammered in the major leagues when he has an option remaining and could get his feet under him in Indianapolis is a question for Talmudic scholars, and is an upper management decision, For the record, last night’s beating raised Morton’s ERA to 9.35—three runs higher than the next worst pitcher in the majors—and dropped his Won-Lost record to 1-9; the Pirates are 19-18 as a team when Morton doesn’t start.

Here are Russell’s puzzlers from last night:

1. Second inning, Cincinnati at bat, runners at first and third, no outs, Pirates behind 5-0. Russell plays the infield back, conceding the run even if they pull off the double play. Five-nothing is a deep hole, but it’s only the second inning; the game’s not over. Unless your manager gives up. (Third baseman Andy LaRoche made the point moot when he threw a potential 5-4-3-double play ball into right field.)

2. Top of the third, Pirates down 7-0, Morton scheduled to lead off the inning. The Reds have betted around in each of the first two innings and Morton has thrown 68 pitches. Russell bats for him. This is fine. He hit the pitcher eighth for all of April, a strategy even Bill James says is a wash because the benefits of having someone on base when the top of the order comes up at least balance out the extra at bats the pitcher gets with men on base because he’s been moved up. On the bench is Delwyn Young, who hit three doubles Monday night and was left off the lineup card in the three subsequent games (Consider this Issue 2A.) Who does Russell send up to bat for Morton? Pitcher Zack Duke, hitting .071. Honest to God.

Was Russell saving a bat for later in the game when a clutch situation might arise? You’re down 7-0 in the third inning. The odds this game will get close if you don’t start closing the gap right now are about the same as me winning a Pulitzer Prize for this blog. Earl Weaver, the greatest manager of my lifetime, used to say you should never lose with bullets left in the gun. If Russell didn’t have any bullets left, it was because, by hitting Duke in that situation, he never even felt like loading the gun.

If things like this makes a relatively casual observer wonder how badly Russell wants to win, what must it do to the players?

No comments: