The players haven't been good, but there has been a serious coaching problem at the big league. A AAA team can do better than 1-15 or 5-24. It doesn't hint at a lack of basic competitiveness, it screams of players not giving a **** anymore. This team has Choo, Santana, Cabrera, got pretty good seasons out of Brantley and Kipnis, and didn't have a bullpen that completely melted down. They shouldn't be threatening 100 losses. Whoever was responsible, in any way, for that rotation should be up for performance review. But this is a team that had the talent to be .500, and Acta should certainly be feeling the heat for the garbage play.

Acta is very bad.

Acta appears to be a very good Strat-o-Matic manager who isn't much for managing an actual baseball club composed of actual baseball players.

Acta hasn’t been perfect, but the sheer volume of losing — 1-15, 5-24 — hints at a lack of basic competitiveness that suggests this is a player problem more than a manager problem.

Perhaps this suggested problem is an indictment of how Shapiro and Antonetti evaluate talent?

Perhaps this suggested problem is an indictment of how Shapiro and Antonetti evaluate talent?

These sorts of problems are almost always overdetermined. When a club that should win 80 wins 65 instead, there's more than enough underperformance to go around. Bad luck, bad management, bad talent evaluation, all of these most likely play a part.

There isn't s more highly regarded front office by the media and saber crowd that have put together as many garbage teams as Shapiro/Antonetti.

Perhaps this suggested problem is an indictment of how Shapiro and Antonetti evaluate talent?

Apropos of nothing, I recently watched Moneyball and was shocked to discover Shapiro's name being pronounced as "Sha-Pie-ro."

I used the comparison toward the end of his run in DC, but Acta really reminds me of Chance the Gardener from Being There. (If you haven't seen it, do... really well done movie!). But the basic premise is that you have this imbecile yet innocent gardener who watches a lot of tv. So he picks up a lot of phrases and expressions that he parrots back because he doesn't know anything else. And the people who hear him take these to be the insights of a hidden genius -- someone who really understands what's going on. So he rises in life, and his phrases remain vacuous, though they delight those who are ok with just the superficial.

All of which is a long way of saying... Sure, he read Baseball by the Numbers, but he still couldn't manage his way out of a wet paper bag.

Wow, Ubaldo Jimenez has been horrible. Velocity's still down, GB rate down, HR's and walks way up.

All of which is a long way of saying... Sure, he read Baseball by the Numbers, but he still couldn't manage his way out of a wet paper bag.

Agree; Acta got the same kind of "it's not his fault, the team sucks" apologist press in Washington, but I never could see why he was qualified for the job in the first place. He showed no indication that he deserved a manager's job when he was here and it puzzled everyone why the Indians hired him, or while now that their team has quit that he has gotten any better. Needham's analogy is terrific. Admitting the Cleveland front office and ownership is bad.

The rotation is horrible (GM "fault") and underperforming (pitching coach/manager "fault"). Seriously, you've got a kid named Zach McAllister at league average after about 100 innings and the next best ERA+ is Masterson at 78. 78! As your "#1" starter (given the other guy's a rookie). The staff has an ERA+ of 80 despite an OK bullpen. That 80 ERA+ is 6 points behind Minnesota in 13th in the AL. That would be the lowest ERA+ in the AL since KC in 2005.

There isn't s more highly regarded front office by the media and saber crowd that have put together as many garbage teams as Shapiro/Antonetti.

Just give Jack Z. some time!

6 - guilty as charged