Can We Get Manuel a Manual?

This article was adapted from The People's Phillies Blog.

Once again, Charlie Manuel opted to make needless defensive substitutions during yesterday's Phillies-Brewers game. Pedro Feliz and T.J. Bohn both entered the game in the later innings, replacing Greg Dobbs and Pat Burrell, respectively. The Feliz move is reasonable, as he is a capable hitter (arguably better than Dobbs even if this year's numbers don't reflect it) and there was a left-handed pitcher on the mound when he first came in, but the Bohn one makes no sense.

The logic, if you can call it that, is that when leading, you want a stronger outfield defense than is possible with Burrell in left. In theory that sounds good. In practice it only helps you if the ball happens to be hit somewhere within Bohn's range and beyond Burrell's. Most of the time the difference in range is negligible, as was the case tonight. Ryan Braun and Prince Fielder both hit to right field and Fielder's bomb would have taken Michael Bourn with a jet-pack to reel it in. And even that wouldn't have been enough if Super Bourn had been in LEFT FIELD.

It might seem like I'm nitpicking here. As mentioned, the balls were hit to right field and Bohn didn't register an at-bat. While both are true, Bohn could have easily gotten up in a clutch situation. (Sure, he delivered the night before, but who would you rather have up with the game on the line: Bohn or Burrell?) Had Feliz gotten a base hit and tied the game in the ninth, the next three batters would have been Chase Utley, Ryan Howard, and, you got it, Bohn.

With a right-handed pitcher on the mound and the hottest hitter on the planet up, what do you think the Brewers do? Probably walk Utley. Then comes Howard, who is giving the Mendoza line more of a fight than he is to most pitchers right now, but he's still a former MVP. If Burrell's in the game, they pitch to Howard and perhaps even Utley, knowing what looms on deck. But with Bohn, why not intentionally walk, or at least pitch around, both Utley and Howard to take on the right-handed hitter with 16 career at-bats? We've seen it before, both this year and last, but Manuel steadfastly refuses to let Burrell stay in any game where the Phillies have a lead, no matter how small.

To make a basketball analogy (it is playoff time after all), this is roughly the equivalent of the Suns removing Amare Stoudemire in favor of Brian Skinner with forty-five seconds left in a game in which the Suns lead by five points, except Stoudemire can't be subbed back in. In theory, that should work out fine. Skinner is a better defender, so his defense should keep the other team from coming back and Skinner's offensive deficiencies shouldn't matter because all the Suns have to do is keep the other team from scoring five points in forty-five seconds The only way this move makes any sense is if the opposing team is practically guaranteed to give the ball to whoever Skinner is guarding, putting his defense to the test.

But what if the opposition avoids Skinner altogether, whether by design or by chance? Then what was the point of the substitution? Now what if the opposing team cuts into the lead or even ties the game? Wouldn't it be better to have Stoudemire out there to possible score a bucket or two and provide some breathing room? Even worse, what if the game goes to overtime and Brian Skinner is your power forward for the duration? And what if this happened game after game after game to the point that some Suns blogger asked an entire paragraph of questions in frustration?

If Mike D'Antoni followed this course of action (provided that the NBA rules changed to make substitutions permanent) he would be run out of town in a hurry. Maybe the basketball comparison isn't perfect, but it helps to bring to light a ridiculous strategical maneuver. One which might not have cost the Phillies this game, but has and will cost them many others.