A fan's observations on the Washington Nationals, from across the virtual divide.

The Font of Accountability

About twenty years ago I worked for a company called GlobeWireless that processed marine telegrams – messages to and from ships at sea. This was done via morse code. Every message that passed through our station was matched with a confirmation receipt. Nobody went home until every message was accounted for as being delivered. If it meant staying an extra two hours to track down the loose ends, that is what you did. My bosses insisted on it, because a lot hinged on the proper delivery of these messages. Money. Sometimes, lives. Records were kept, and we could prove the delivery of every message going back many years.

Years later, when I started working in the hospitality industry, I noticed that there was a certain similarity in the process. Our guests would want certain items reserved on their behalf, and we would make those reservations. As the manager, I insisted that we get written confirmation of every reservation, and that confirmation be compared to and attached to the original request. That way we could prove that every reservation had been made for the guests. The only problem was, my boss thought that was an unnecessary step, and so she wouldn’t back me up when it came to insisting my employees follow the processes.

The reason I mention these two examples is because I wanted to point out that accountability is an organizational value that starts at the very top of an organization, and the values that are held at the top are the ones that are implemented at the bottom.

What does this have to do with baseball? Only this: Look at the product that we see on the field at Nationals Park. How accountable are the players to the outcomes? Only as accountable as their manager asks them to be… who is only as accountable as his boss asks him to be… and so on, up the chain.

This is one of the reasons that I am much more concerned about the errors that the Nationals make than I am about the bullpen. Errors are, by definition… errors. They are the plays that the defense should make, but does not. Contrast errors with skill and talent: Ronnie Belliard can play third base, and he and Ryan Zimmermancould have the same fielding percentage, and have the same number of errors. But having Belliard at third is not the same as having Zimmerman. A sharply hit ball down the third base line gets snagged by Zimmerman and is scored 5-3, while the same ball is a double with Belliard at third. And that isn’t an indictment of Belliard – it is just that Zimmerman is more talented.

Yesterday’s game is a perfect example of one where we’re ready to pile onto the bullpen (and certainly the bullpen didn’t hold up their end of the bargain), but the real damage was done earlier in the game – by errors.  Ross Detwiler lasted five innings, but his defense gave up three errors. In my Fantasy Baseball Alternate Universe, if you take those three errors away, Detwiler goes six innings instead of five, with the same number of pitches (84), and comes into the 7th inning facing the 8-9-1 batters, and a 5-2 lead! Now, I know that you can’t simply advance through the results and assume they would be the same had certain events not occurred, but you have to admit, this would certainly be a plausible outcome - without those three errors. At that point, Manny Acta could have sent Detwiler out for the seventh, warming two pitchers in the bullpen, and be one inning further down the road, with a bigger lead, and a strategic advantage. The bullpen might well have blown up in the Alternate Universe, too. But the bullpen would have been entering into the game in a very different situation… one where they had a much better chance of success, and one that a winning team designs their bullpen around.

There may not be much that the Nats can do about the bullpen, in terms of talent. In today’s Nationals Journal, Chico Harlan points out that half of the Nats bullpen has a negative VORP (for the uninitiated, there is some discussion and explanation of this statistic in the comments of that posting). That statistic is calculated on the historical outcomes, so it is hard to separate talent from performance from VORP. But on the defensive side of the equation, the performance of the pitchers and the performance of the defense are not inseparable from the talent of the pitchers and the talent of the defense. In other words, if the team is not being asked to be accountable for their outcomes when they have the ball – when four errors in a game is minimized at the expense of overworking the bullpen, and hoping the bats come and bail you out - that is an organizational problem, not a talent problem. Being the less-talented team is acceptable – disappointing, but acceptable. Being a better team that is not playing at the level they are capable of is not.

Errors, narrowly defined as a statistic, do not answer all of the questions. Errors, as a statistic, are an indication of the larger problem. The problem that makes the Nats play sloppy in all aspects of their game. The problem that causes Elijah Dukes to be picked off first four times. The problem that has bullpen pitchers taking the mound and believing that they need to be perfect, because if the defense isn’t there for them, the pitcher is the one on the way back to Syracuse (or free agency, in the case of Mike Hinckley). The problem that prevents a team from executing basic, fundamental baseball.

It isn’t about errors. It isn’t about poor baserunning. It isn’t about the bullpen or the pitching – and in fact, complaining about that distracts from the real issue. It is about being sloppy and unprofessional in every aspect of their game. The Nationals are sloppy because they are allowed to be sloppy. I am not saying they’re not trying. I am saying they’re not disciplined.

Rob Dibble has advocated that the Nationals take infield practice every day. There’s something to be said for that, though it has to be part of a larger belief – that excellence and being accountable for the outcomes is important. That has to be a core organizational belief. And it has to come from the top, Ted Lerner. If you’re still unconvinced, you only need to look up I-95 forty miles. The Orioles were the envy of every Major League team in the 70′s and 80′s. They created “The Orioles Way”, which was an organizational philosophy of excellence. Everything they did furthered that goal. Enter Peter Angelos. Witness the death of “The Orioles Way.”

It isn’t that the Nats are not talented. It is that nobody is holding the organization accountable for doing their jobs. When Ted insists that it be done, it will be done. And if it isn’t, find someone that will do it.



  • Nice piece.

    Do we agree that Ted needs to fire Manny and get someone in there who will do the job. I mean, I would hope that he has expressed his displeasure about the team’s performance with Manny.

    Comment by Willie — May 21, 2009 @ 7:41 am

  • Thanks for the comment, Willie…

    It isn’t that simple, in my opinion. From where I sit, the organization is a representation of its culture. In the criteria that we as fans are most interested, the performance on the field, they are pretty sloppy. In other categories, that may not be the case.

    Let me give you a totally unrelated example. Suppose you live in a neighborhood, and McDonalds is building a new restaurant down the street from you. You’re concerned because a McDonalds isn’t all that attractive, and there’s the trash, and the extra traffic that goes along with that. Your concern, as an external viewer (the same situation as a fan, because you’re also a potential customer) is whether the building is attractive, and whether they are going to be good neighbors. McDonalds is concerned about that too, but their reasons for being concerned are different than yours. They want their building to be attractive enough to prevent you and your neighbors from going through zoning and court channels to block the construction, and also they have a branding issue, and want the McDonalds to meet their franchising standards.

    On the surface, your goals and McDonalds goals, in terms of the aesthetic of the building, are the same. You want it to look nice, they want it to look nice. But the motivations are different, and “good enough” for you is not the same as “good enough” for them. Because of that, you may not get the result that you want from the new construction, since it is McDonalds who has the final say.

    My point about the Nationals is the same. Ownership wants a winner. You want a winner. But the motivations for those, and the methods by which they are achieved, may be different.

    I think it is fair to say that as business people, there are few more successful than the Lerner family. That isn’t to say that they don’t make mistakes sometimes, and that some of their projects are more successful than others. But in terms of operating a business, they get it done. Which means that as an organization, they have a pretty clear set of goals, and then set out to achieve them. The annals of business history are littered with failed businesses that didn’t have that kind of organizational clarity.

    In my opinion, the Lerner family has made two important mistakes in their tenure as owners. The first was keeping Jim Bowden as long as they did. There was speculation about it at the time, but they would have been completely justified to let him go at the time they took over ownership, and at the latest, at the end of the 2006 season, for no other reason than to get their own people into the organization. Bowden successfully made the argument to the Lerner family that he was the right person, but this is one of those cases where change for change’s sake would have been the right move. Second, I believe the Lerner family is too patient. Certainly, owning a baseball team is a long term project, and you have to think about it strategically, and that your outcomes are years away. But the incremental steps that get you from here to there need to happen at a better pace. That said, I think the first mistake begat the second, so a lot of what appears to be stagnation is leftover toxicity from the Bowden era.

    I don’t know if firing Manny is the right choice. I think that it is more likely than not that it is the wrong choice. My concern is that the organization does not have a plan for ‘excellence’. The mistake here would be to say that the problem is one of execution, and that the manager is primarily the one responsible for how the team plays. On an organizational chart, that is true, but the first thing they teach you in communication school is that an organizational chart is a waste of paper. What matters is what values are important to the organization. When winning the World Series is the first, most important goal of the Nationals, I think you can safely assume that the Lerner family will do everything they can to make that happen. They don’t leave anything to chance. Manny could be a part of that. That his team is struggling now could well be a reflection of the organizations values. The fact that he’s still around suggests that the on-field outcomes are not as important as we might like them to be.

    I think as fans, we need to be more patient, because a lot of where we are today has to do with Bowden (and not just because of his personnel decisions) and it will take some time for Rizzo and Kasten to get that part of the organization cured.

    Comment by Wigi — May 21, 2009 @ 9:53 am

  • Impressive piece. I’d like to talk with you about increasing exposure to your work though Bleacher Report. Please email me at mtcheyan@bleacherreport.com if you’re interested and I can give you some more info and background about how it works.


    Comment by Max Tcheyan — May 21, 2009 @ 1:31 pm

  • [...] The Font of Accountability [...]

    Pingback by Planetary Nats Blog » All of the Pieces — May 23, 2009 @ 9:30 pm

  • [...] The Font of Accountability [...]

    Pingback by Planetary Nats Blog » Sloopy… (er, Sloppy) — May 26, 2009 @ 2:51 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment