Welcome to Tribe Talk, where Bleacher Report's Tribe fans weigh in on the ups and downs of the Indians each week throughout the season.
This week we debate how to divvy up the blame for the season between Mark Shapiro and Eric Wedge, how Shapiro’s strategy of cobbling together a team from spare parts has backfired, and what players should and shouldn’t say to the media.
I would like to thank this week's participants Dale Thomas, Scott Miles, and Jeff Smirnoff for their contributions.
This discussion is open to all, so please feel free to comment below and pitch in your thoughts on the questions we're addressing this week.
Go Tribe!
1. The chances of Eric Wedge being fired have been discussed ad nauseum over the course of the season. A notably less popular topic is the fate of Mark Shapiro.
Most everyone agrees Wedge should be held accountable for the team's terrible performance, but is it fair that Wedge has been saddled with nearly all of the blame while Shapiro is rarely criticized?
Who do you think is more to blame, Shapiro or Wedge? If you were in charge, who would you fire: Wedge, Shapiro, or both?
Dale Thomas: Well, it was Shapiro that hired Wedge in the first place, so Shapiro is on auto-blame in my opinion. Shapiro seems to happily seek out the mediocre, whether it is players or staff, then makes small moves that have small effects. Each season, it's hard to believe (and hard to stomach) what "didn't" happen to fill the team's needs.
This is not to say that Shapiro hasn't done a few significant things, but those things tend to be outgoing moves of contributing players (Casey Blake, CC Sabathia, etc.). Then the team just moves guys around the field and plays a lot of yo-yo between the Major and Minor Leagues.
The Indians are stuck on a hamster wheel, and BOTH guys in charge share equal dizziness. That said, the big guy should go first, then the rest follow on out the door like rats to the Shapiro'd Piper.
Samantha Bunten: Shapiro's mostly futile maneuvers to tweak the team over the years have done as much, if not more, damage to the franchise as Eric Wedge's bumbling managerial stint. He is to blame at least as much as Wedge is, and Wedge has been taking nearly all the heat for it despite the fact that he’s no more than 50 percent of the problem.
While Shapiro has made a number of slick trades with very positive outcomes for players like Sizemore, Lee, Choo, and Hafner, the drafts he has overseen have been appallingly bad and disasters outnumber successes among his free agent acquisitions.
Further, Shapiro's relentless defending of Wedge has left the two inextricably linked. Shapiro has tied his own fate to Wedge's by defending his beleaguered manager when he should not have done so. Shapiro essentially made Wedge and himself into a package deal, which means whoever goes first will likely take the other down with him.
If it were up to me I would fire them both, but the first guy I would send packing would be Shapiro. His mistakes, in my opinion, have cost the team more dearly than Wedge's, highlighted by the fact that in hiring and refusing to fire wedge, Wedge's mistakes are also in a way his own.
Scott Miles: It would have to be Mark Shapiro without a doubt. The only credit one can give to Shapiro is that he picks up a lot of these "highly touted" prospects from other teams when the Indians are going south and trading away the veterans. Players such as Cliff Lee, Grady Sizemore, Travis Hafner, Asdrubal Cabrera and Shin-Soo Choo have all come in trades.
But Shapiro has, frankly, been dismal in signing free agents and in the draft, the two areas where small-to-mid market teams must excel. Numerous first round picks have turned into busts (if they've even reached the big leagues), as have acquisitions such as David Dellucci, Jason Michaels and (to a lesser extent because at least the team was good in 2007) Trot Nixon.
At this point both should go, but Wedge can only play the guys he's been given. That's directly caused by the GM.
Jeff Smirnoff: Both are equally culpable. Wedge starts slow every year and always chokes/falters/fails when there are expectations or the Indians are in a superior position. It has happened too many times to be coincidence.
It is not all his fault that some players have performed horribly but he has continued, for almost seven years, to put certain players in bad spots again and again. We see the same poor fundamentals and mistakes over and over again, and that falls on the manager.
Shapiro is responsible for the awful drafts from when he took over until 2007 that have left the minors low on talent, especially in pitching. But he has acknowledged this is a problem and they are re-evaluating how to draft and develop players.
He is also at fault for signing sub-par veteran talent time and time again (partially because of the poor drafting) ever since he struck gold with Bob Howry. That needs to stop this offseason, and he has admitted his faults and said that.
He also is great at acquiring talent from other teams (Hafner, Choo, Cabrera, et al), which has helped stop some of the bleeding. So, I think he deserves a second chance as long as he realizes the team needs a new voice on the field. Eric Wedge's time has come but Shapiro deserves to stay if he realizes this.
2. In all fairness, Shapiro can't really be blamed for the way this season started - no one could have predicted such a disaster. However, it is still Shapiro's job to fix it, and it hasn't been fixed.
The recent Mark DeRosa for Chris Perez trade exemplifies Shapiro's strategy thus far of making small adjustments with the hope of improving the team through fine tuning. Do you think this is a solid strategy, or do you think that a mess this big calls for a big move to fix it?
Now put yourself in Mark Shapiro's place: How big of a move would you be willing to make? Would you trade a high-value player now to get pitching, or would your big move be to start the fire sale?
Dale Thomas: Why can't we blame Shapiro? Hey, if there are seven blown cylinders and three flat tires on this Yugo of a team, then a new spark plug ain't gonna help.
If you allow zero runs in every game, then it only takes a small offense to win. Trade the bats, keep the defense and get good pitching. The problem with this approach is that we have very little to work with. Right now a fire sale would be more like a single match in a strong wind.
This situation is squarely on the shoulders of Shapiro, as he has let the valuable or even semi-valuable guys trickle off to other teams while getting nothing in return. Those players that had some potential and did sign with us have been wasting away under the "Wedge anti-development program."
Samantha Bunten: Shapiro's allergy to making the “big move” is what has sunk this team in the long run. The little, fine tuning moves he makes are the type that should belong to a team which is already performing well and needs to be tweaked to reach its optimal potential—not those of a franchise that is falling apart at the seams.
Shapiro's only big moves of late have been those where his hand was forced (the trade of Sabathia, for example), and those moves were geared toward acquiring prospects for use years down the road.
Bolstering the farm system is always necessary, but moves that serve only the future and not the present aren’t appropriate for a team in the Indians’ current situation. This would be fine if the team was rebuilding, but this is a team that is supposed to be a contender, so acquisitions should be largely geared toward improving the product on the field right now.
Were I in Shapiro's place, I would have been willing to make a pretty serious move to save the season—in May. Now, 2009 has become a season which is not worth trading the future for. Any trade of a major player now would just worsen a team that is already really, really terrible.
The big moves should be made in the offseason, when the Indians can start over and try to put a winner on the field for 2010.
Scott Miles: Any team willing to offer talented young pitching in a trade should be heard. Just in case fans forget, our two through five starters are Carl Pavano, Tomo Ohka, Jeremy Sowers and David Huff. Yikes, yikes, yikes!
I would look to unload Jamey Carroll and Ryan Garko first. I love Carroll but he is not a key piece right now. Garko can drive in runs, but he's never going to be a .300 hitter and he's never going to hit 25-plus HRs.
Players like Carroll and Garko won't yield big returns, but we need as much depth as we can get in the pitching staff. I don't think the team needs a complete overhaul, just more than one or two pitchers whom you can depend on to get outs.
Jeff Smirnoff: Being in the AL Central every year makes it easier to address. The big problem is that Shapiro has never adhered to his promise of "waves of arms" to support the big league level.
Most of the draft choices from when he took over until 2007 have bombed. They have only developed two relievers in Rafael Perez and Jensen Lewis. They have no impact arms; only soft tossing lefties like Jeremy Sowers, Scott Lewis and Aaron Laffey.
He has started after the first bullpen blow-up this season and has stated that they will change the way they draft and cultivate pitching, which they have begun to do with the draft in 2009 and trading for Chris Perez.
A big move is not needed—just tactical ones. You need a No. 1 starter and No. 3 hitter, so if Cliff Lee or Victor Martinez are moved the Indians are not only giving up on 2009 but 2010 and 2011 as well and the fanbase should riot.
Trade your expiring assets like Carroll and Pavano, and actively shop pieces like Garko and Shoppach that can help contending teams but shouldn't be in the Indians' long term plans.
Get the young talent (LaPorta, Brantley, Meloan, Torregas, et al) up here and see if they are part of the solution. It's obvious that Garko, Shoppach, and Francisco are not.
3. Carl Pavano looked great in May, going 5-1 with a .259 batting average against. June has been a different story, where Pavano has gone 1-2 with a .351 batting average against.
So which is the real Pavano—the guy who showed up in May and looked like the Pavano who won 18 games for the Marlins in 2004, or the guy who showed up in June and looked like a train wreck as he surrendered eight runs to a normally anemic Pirates offense in 3.1 innings?
Do you think Pavano's recent struggles are just poor performance, the product of an injury, or arm fatigue resulting from resuming a full work load after not pitching for two years?
Dale Thomas: To begin with, Pavano's career record is under .500. So since he’s gone 6-3 for the Tribe in May and June, he's already better than he is, so to say. He also has not gone down in a heap or been in any rib-breaking car wrecks (that we know of)....yet.
He's had two excellent seasons out of nine, so somewhere in the next 4.5 years, he should have another one. Let's save it for next year (if the Tribe re-sign him) and hope we have a bullpen that can hold a seven-run lead.
I would rest him a lot this year and feed him vitamin-rich milk or something so he doesn't succumb to the disabled list like he did in 2001, 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008. I think his recent struggles are actually ongoing struggles that he has experienced for the majority of his major-league life.
Samantha Bunten: Neither extreme is the real Pavano. They are merely the phases that are symptomatic of a very average pitcher. Like every other mediocre starting MLB pitcher, Pavano will have good years and bad years, and good months or weeks and bad months or weeks within them.
Perhaps we are all disappointed in Pavano because we had begun expecting too much out of him. The Indians signed him as a big question mark who, if healthy, could bolster the back end of the rotation. He wasn’t brought in to be one of the team’s best starters—that expectation was only foisted on him because of how poorly everyone else in the rotation (other than Cliff Lee) has pitched.
Pavano’s struggles in June might also be linked specifically to a standard case of arm fatigue. Pavano threw a total of 45.2 innings in 2007 and 2008. Less than halfway through the 2009 season, he has already thrown 92.1 innings.
Essentially he’s thrown twice as many pitches in half a season as he did over the previous two years. The fact that this might be more wear and tear than his arm can endure after so much idleness should not surprise anyone.
Scott Miles: I think we're seeing what Carl Pavano, at 33-years old, is going to offer us. Some starts he will have flashes back to what gave him the huge contract with the Yankees. Other starts will remind us of why he only pitched in 26 games in three years in New York.
I think Pavano, at this stage of his career, is going to need that extra day or two of rest every several starts. The June starts proved that you can't just keep throwing a guy out there every five days at that age and with that injury history.
So keep his innings in check and give him that extra rest every so often and he will return to being a decent, yet not spectacular, pitcher.
Jeff Smirnoff: Carl Pavano is who we thought he was! He is an average MLB pitcher who will have ups and downs. He had a great May and is struggling in June. Anyone who didn't expect that was fooling themselves.
However, it does look like he was battling some sort of injury the last few times out (also expected) and it is definitely affecting him. This is part of being an average pitcher and part of working through injury.
4. It takes a lot for a manager to publicly call out a player (especially a 'player's manager' like Eric Wedge), yet Wedge has done this to Jhonny Peralta on multiple occasions. In the most recent instance about a week ago, Peralta fired back.
While it is not uncommon for a player to defend himself in such a situation, Peralta's comments went beyond arguing his case when he not only undermined his manager, but alluded to an eagerness to play for another team.
Do you think Peralta's comments were out of line? Is it ever OK for a player to publicly question his coach?
Dale Thomas: Spats between players and coaches should always remain between the two. Each simply uses the media because they can't sell their arguments on their own.
I know if I had a professional writer listening to only me, I'd probably win more arguments...then again, if I were Jhonny Peralta, it might take a lot more than a professional writer to locate any merit in my energy-exempt performance with the Tribe.
Of course one could say the same thing about Wedge. Maybe these two should be on an Indians deadpan debate team since yapping about each other is the only time we see them eager for anything.
Samantha Bunten: I’m of the opinion that you solve your own problems in your own house, so I cannot condone Peralta whining to the media about Wedge, or Wedge calling Peralta out in a public forum in the first place.
While this is likely a product of frustration that has begun to boil over on both their parts, lashing out at one another publicly does not do Peralta, Wedge, or the team as a whole any favors.
Other team members don’t need the extra headache this brings on, and fans don’t want to watch players or managers point fingers at each other in an attempt to dump the blame on someone else for ruining the season. No one wants to hear your excuses, and no one wants to see your dirty laundry.
To address this situation specifically, I do not actually have a problem with Peralta defending himself even if it means taking a shot at Wedge. Normally, I would see this as disrespectful, but under the current circumstances it just provides more proof that Wedge has lost the respect of his players.
What I do have a problem with is Peralta’s thinly-veiled reference to wanting to play for another team. Players should never publicly declare to their fans that they just can’t wait to run off and abandon them.
This comment was classless, unprofessional, and apathetic, which, sadly, is exactly what I expect from Jhonny Peralta. If he wants to play for another team, I say good riddance. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.
Scott Miles: I just think it is pent-up frustration. Peralta, right or wrong, has been in Wedge's doghouse more than any other player not named Brandon Phillips or Josh Barfield.
While I don't agree with calling out a coach or manager publicly, I think a bit too much can be made of it (especially a player of Peralta's caliber—if you have someone like Derek Jeter or Albert Pujols calling out a manager, then I'd take notice.)
In a season like this, I don't think Peralta calling out Wedge is that big of a deal.
Jeff Smirnoff: No I do not. If Wedge is going to publicly call out Peralta, then turnabout is fair play.
Jhonny Peralta is a very frustrating player to watch play. When he is "on" he is great but when he is not he can look pretty bad, especially because of his demeanor.
I think Peralta is a talented player. I think he would benefit from a change in leadership. The Indians do not have a ton of top talent on the roster right now and need Peralta. I think he is one of many players who could benefit from a new managerial voice.
5. Fun Question of the Week: The All-Star game is fast approaching, and a team as bad as the Indians typically only gets one player onto the roster for the summer classic. In your opinion, who is more deserving of the nod: Cliff Lee or Victor Martinez? Why?
Dale Thomas: Cliff Lee all the way. Cliff has thrown well, even in his losses. Also to his credit, he hasn't broken any bones punching stuff when our bullpen kills his leads.
Victor is a great hitter, but he still can't play defense with any authority whatsoever. In a game of darts, Victor couldn't even hit the dart board, much less hit the bulls-eye. In a ballgame, he can't hit the second or third baseman even with a pitch-out and a runner that trips a couple of times. We've actually seen this.
Since this is a “fun” question, I'll say we get one "player" and one DH on the roster and Victor gets the DH spot for being really good at HALF the game.
Samantha Bunten: Both Lee and Martinez deserve to go, but the worst team in the American League is not likely to get two roster spots at the All-Star game.
If the All-Star game were truly about choosing the best player, then the nod would go to Lee. Martinez has an impressive average at .313, but his offensive numbers across the board are not nearly good enough to make up for his absolutely horrendous defense, so Lee is the better player because he isn't failing at 50 percent of his job.
However, whether it is right or wrong, the All-Star game isn't really about showcasing the "best" players, it is about showcasing the fan favorites. Lee wins the skill contest, but by All-Star game standards, Martinez should represent the Tribe. This game is for the fans, and I think the fans would rather see Martinez.
Scott Miles: Personally I think both will make the team. But if I had to choose just one, I would have to go with Victor Martinez.
Though his offensive production has cooled considerably, he's still the most dangerous hitter in the lineup now. Not only that, he's playing two positions, and he's the only one who actually seems to care about the team's performance night in and night out. He's the true definition of a leader, he's played well—it would have to be Victor Martinez.
Jeff Smirnoff: Victor Martinez. He has been consistent all season minus a small interleague stretch. Cliff Lee also deserves to go but will not because of his poor win-loss record and slow start in April.
- Login to post comments