Are you saying record in one run games doesn't reflect on a manager? If not, then what does reflect on a manager?
Lineups, substitutions, interaction w/ umpires, morale, communication, energy and effort. Results alone don't reflect on the manager, it's how those results happen. If they lose to a marginal team throwing mediocre pitchers 4-0 or 4-1 because Yordan is given a day off and Singleton is starting vs a LHSP that reflects more on the manager than losing 6-5 after Hader blows a save. Putting Hader in for the save is exactly what should be done 95% of the time (other 5% being based on usage and rest) So that's an example of a 3 or 4 run loss being more on the manager than a 1 run loss.
I'm a bottom line guy and results are all that matter. Could've, should've, would'ves wont get you to the playoffs. Decisions managers make when everything is on the line is what determines how good a manager is. See: Hinch and his decision to use Harris who he admitted before the game was worn out, over a Cy Young level Cole. This is real life decision making, not just going by what a spreadsheet tells you that you should do. It's the difference between a great manager like Bochy and a good manager like Dusty.
Manager has some impact on 1-run games, but a lot of that is whether his high leverage relievers pitched well or not. On what reflects on a manager, IMO: 1) Is the bullpen always stressed while the starting rotation has pitched a ton of innings? 2) Has he played a reliever in the OF? 3) Is he playing a guy regularly over someone that is a lot better? 4) Does he bat a bad hitter second? 5) Does his last name start with "La"? 6) Is he playing one of the best defensive OFs in LF because the CF hits better and is a veteran? 7) Does his lefty, righty specialists not get platoon advantages as often as other teams?
Of course it takes player execution. The thing is small ball usually wins extra inning games. I'm not sure if Espada doesn't believe in small ball, or if he doesn't believe his players can execute small ball.tactics.
I'm sure a major issue is that small ball no longer exists in the metrics heavy world of MLB 2024. I think a extra innings, and a tie game in the bottom of the ninth should be absolute exceptions. Part of the issue is that without regular practice, the execution is much less likely. And reducing the chances of execution on top of a strategy that limits the possibility of multiple runs makes it much less likely to result in winning games.
Managers don’t make near the impact some of you believe they do. They can definitely harm your team by making decisions like playing Maldy over Diaz though. And my point about Seattle was Scott Servais wasn’t a “good manager” early in the season when they were winning one run games only to became a “bad manager” mid season when they started losing them.
I assume you are referring to the reluctance to bunt in extra innings? This isn’t an Espada tactic. We’ve been this way for years. This is an organizational approach that is based on analytics. Regardless, have you seen the times we have actually tried to sacrifice bunt? I can think of several attempts by Chas and Meyers where they both failed.
Great teams usually have a nice blend of power and small ball. Having the coaches and hitters employ the best tactic for the situation is good baseball. It’s actually what fans expect and/or ask for. not arguing. Just adding my 2 cents
