Referendum on John Farrell

[Maxbialystock]

This isn't really about Farrell as much as it is about all MLB managers. My thesis is simple: yes, some managers are better than others, but by and large we give MLB managers way too much credit for wins and losses. Unlike NFL coaches, for example, they only have to manage a few players, and in a solid start perhaps just 9 or 10 or 11 of a 25 man roster is used.

 

Good NFL coaches, I've heard, virtually live in the practice facility or at least spend endless hours going over film and preparing the next game. MLB managers have a lot more games, but could easily show up 3 hours before game time and miss nothing of importance. They show up earlier, of course, because that is their office. And during a game there is ample time to review all kinds of statistics and tendencies before any move is made. Even the lineup card is a piece of cake because, guess what, the manager only has 13 position players for the 9 lineup slots. Casey Stengal was known for platooning, especially in the outfield, but what could be simpler than starting a righty bat against a lefty starter or vice versa?

 

Now I happen to think Joe Maddon is a pretty good manager. Right now his Cubs are 15-5, so he must be good, right? But guess what? The Cubs are second in MLB in runs scored (and way ahead of the Sox) and 2d in MLB in ERA. How many smarts does it take to win with that kind of talent?

I happen to think the Yankees Girardi is pretty good too, but his team is mired in last place because their hitting is so-so and their pitching is almost as bad as ours.

 

Which brings me to Farrell. Last year I would have been fine with firing him even though I thought he had a wretched rotation and some lineup players--Sandoval, Napoli, Ramirez, and one or more of the outfielder--who were dragging the team down. Moreover, I thought he did a great job two years before taking the team to a WS win after a losing season under Bobby V. This year I have no problem with the thesis that the FO has given Farrell fair warning: win or else.

 

That said, it is also apparent to me that Farrell, while he does enjoy a terrific run-scoring lineup, once again is struggling with the world's worst rotation and a closer with a high era. 11-9 is about right for this team, whoever is managing it. PIck your manager, bring him in, and I am confident he would manage about as well, but not better. Why? Because managers don't make that much difference.

[Slasher9]

IMO A HoF manager is worth +5 to +10 wins in a season. so in reality he is only about 4-5% better than a crappy skipper.

football is more impact because: 16 game season.

[User Name]

A bad manager can cost his team a significant amount of games. Leaving a starter in too long, leaving a reliever in too long, sub-optimal lineup construction.

 

The impact a crappy manager has on his team is way more significant than the impact a good manager that doesn't get in his own way.

[Bellhorn04]

There's no real way to quantify it. Managers do make in-game decisions that can change the outcome, but you don't know if things would have been different if they had made a different move.

 

Over the course of the season one of the manager's biggest tasks is utilizing his bullpen properly, especially the way the game is now.

 

Then there is the true X factor - the clubhouse factor, the motivation of the players.

[SoxnCycles]

IMO A HoF manager is worth +5 to +10 wins in a season. so in reality he is only about 4-5% better than a crappy skipper.

football is more impact because: 16 game season.

 

Yup, and while both are team sports, baseball is more individual against individual (pitcher/batter), until the ball is in play anyway.

 

Football coaches have a much bigger impact on game planning and play execution than baseball managers.

Other than the lineup, baserunning directions and pulling pitchers, managers pretty much just send them out there.

[SinceYaz]

Howdy Max,

 

I think there is a solid concern here that plays to the way professional athletes are coddled these days. Since that is true, the manager is as much a manager of personalities as anything. The financial investment in the players, more so in the NBA than any other, makes it necessary to have an understanding person in the seat. We have coaches to help with personalities, life coaches, all sorts of things ... in the old days the manager was the boss, now he's a facilitator. That was Tito's magic. We know there was all sorts of screaming about his on field calls, but there isn't one player who didn't stand to benefit from his people skills. Manny being Manny, Paps, et, al, ....

 

Joe Madden is a deep soul who puts his players first and they respond with playing with good fundamentals and team first-ness. His depth includes having fun, building odd quirks that the guys buy into, building team .... well, I begin to repeat.

 

Farrell has the same "player first" heart. We don't agree with some of his calls, but he led a near miraculous WS title in 2013. If we remember correctly, many of us were in love with our kids, even in 2013. The FO was not loath to hide our kids ... we had as many as 7 rookies starting at a time in 2014. What could Farrell do with that? Had the kids played up to the hype, Farrell would not have been the target of displeasure by so many. It's true that some would never be happy. (If we happen to win the WS THIS YEAR, there will still be those who will hold the 2 last place finishes against Farrell. ) Had the five aces held up last season .... and the FO is in charge of the acquisition of players, not the field manager. Other teams speak highly of Farrell's ability to build a team, other than angry Toronto fans, that is. I listen to the feeds from the other team and hear only good things about Farrell.

 

Had the players performed as expected ...

 

I know this is flash point, but apparently Farrell even tries to make pariah like Panda comfortable enough to be a team mate.

 

...

 

Not sure how to close this but if the players don't perform, the manager can be the best guy out there ... and be a loser. Buck Showalter was a genius in Baltimore the first 10 days of the season because the O's were unbeaten. Is he a bum now that they have a losing record and we are a half game out?

[User Name]

Farrell is not a good in-game tactician. That is an undeniable fact. His teams run the bases like idiots and his BP management is head-scratching. That said, the ability to manage the big egos in the Boston pressure cooker is invaluable. Farrell has that ability.

 

The problem is that we may be running and inferior manager out every night with a better option staring up at him from the bench coach position. The fact that the Sox had to greatly overpay Lovullo to keep him from being stolen away by another team speaks volumes to his standing in the industry.

[SinceYaz]

Does the better play of the team under Lovullo last season say anything ...

[User Name]

It wasn't significant sample size (there we go with the sample thing, but it's appropriate), but clearly there's something there.

[SinceYaz]

I'm more loyal than Tito, so it hurts me to say that I think it may well be so. It appeared the kids responded to Lovullo ... just a take I heard somewhere else.

 

I think DD is going to use Farrell as a platform for now. If things advance, get better, Farrell is ok. If not, Tony is right there..

[Dojji]

It wasn't significant sample size (there we go with the sample thing, but it's appropriate), but clearly there's something there.

 

I'm not sure it's all that clear. I think there's absolutely nothing useful you can tell about a manager in a 50 game sample and by the time Lovullo was in charge the season was settled and no one was playing for anything other than next year's contract.

[User Name]

I'm not sure it's all that clear. I think there's absolutely nothing useful you can tell about a manager in a 50 game sample and by the time Lovullo was in charge the season was settled and no one was playing for anything other than next year's contract.

 

But as I stated above, the fact that the Sox had to overpay pretty hard to keep another team from vulture-diving and taking him away speaks volumes as to his standing in the industry.

[Dojji]

Yes, and it also says they're considering him as a potential successor. Actually if I was going to pick the next manager of the Red Sox I'd want DeMarlo Hale, not Lovullo. I've got a hunch about him, and he was part of the glory years and served under Tito as a bench coach.

[Slasher9]

Lovullo probably earned the next shot with the way the team played during JF cancer time but i wouldnt mind at all if they gave Tek the reigns....

[sk7326]

Lovullo probably earned the next shot with the way the team played during JF cancer time but i wouldnt mind at all if they gave Tek the reigns....

 

Absolutely not - Tek has never filled in a lineup card. His time as catcher is wildly overrated - he was an outstanding catcher, but vintage Pedro Martinez could make a trained seal look good back there.

 

If Farrell is gone, you look at guys like Lovullo, Alex Cora, Bud Black. Managing is an actual job - and I'd like somebody with some experience doing it.

[Dojji]

Yeah Tek has no coaching experience, this is not a good team for untried manager

[a700hitter]

Absolutely not - Tek has never filled in a lineup card. His time as catcher is wildly overrated - he was an outstanding catcher, but vintage Pedro Martinez could make a trained seal look good back there.

 

If Farrell is gone, you look at guys like Lovullo, Alex Cora, Bud Black. Managing is an actual job - and I'd like somebody with some experience doing it.

In his book, Pedro gave Varitek a lot of credit. He thought very highly of him.

[sk7326]

In his book, Pedro gave Varitek a lot of credit. He thought very highly of him.

 

I'm glad he does. Does not alter the likelihood that Varitek's actual impact on something like that was moderate. Pedro had one of the best pitching years of all time before he got to Boston and well, you know his time here.

 

And none of that has anything to do with his managerial qualifications (basically, none).

[sk7326]

Yeah Tek has no coaching experience, this is not a good team for untried manager

 

There are two general aspects to managing - the part we see and the part we don't.

 

UN is right - relative to the part we see, Farrell is not very good. He makes suboptimal bullpen decisions, and while in 2013 there was decent evidence he knew how to deploy the position players optimally, that has not continued in 2014-15. His treatment of the young players in particular (and I cannot separate this from management since he is following their strategy) has been profoundly problematic.

 

To the part we don't see - Farrell is better. The players respect him, and I don't think you have the sort of dogging it open rebellion issues which plague lesser leaders. He also has dealt well with the media, which is a very important part of the gig.

[a700hitter]

I'm glad he does. Does not alter the likelihood that Varitek's actual impact on something like that was moderate. Pedro had one of the best pitching years of all time before he got to Boston and well, you know his time here.

 

And none of that has anything to do with his managerial qualifications (basically, none).

Maybe, but Tek did his homework, he has the respect of the players, and being manager doesn't require a lot of smarts or ability. That being said, I would make Lovullo the manager and Tek the bench coach.

[SoxnCycles]

Does the better play of the team under Lovullo last season say anything ...

 

I think it says the players wanted to demonstrate to the new boss (DD) that they could play.

[Dojji]

I think Tek would do a good job learning the ropes as a bench coach. I'm under the impression that he's been working his way up the front office chain however.

[mvp 78]

f*** Farrell. He sucks. Lovullo is better.

[sk7326]

Maybe, but Tek did his homework, he has the respect of the players, and being manager doesn't require a lot of smarts or ability. That being said, I would make Lovullo the manager and Tek the bench coach.

 

It does - in so far that it is a real job that some people do better than others. I live outside of DC, so I got to witness the Matt Williams experience up close. It'd be nice to have a guy who has at least managed somewhere professionally. (Gabe Kapler would be another really good candidate)

 

For this job in particular, a true first timer would be hard to work with. Francona had a perfect storm of qualifications - that doesn't happen every day.

[User Name]

Maybe, but Tek did his homework, he has the respect of the players, and being manager doesn't require a lot of smarts or ability. That being said, I would make Lovullo the manager and Tek the bench coach.

 

I like this idea.

[User Name]

It does - in so far that it is a real job that some people do better than others. I live outside of DC, so I got to witness the Matt Williams experience up close. It'd be nice to have a guy who has at least managed somewhere professionally. (Gabe Kapler would be another really good candidate)

 

For this job in particular, a true first timer would be hard to work with. Francona had a perfect storm of qualifications - that doesn't happen every day.

 

I think he's understating the manager's job. Many people do, in my opinion.

[Kingface]

With the money that Lovullo signed for.....that's not bench coach $$$$.....he WILL be the manager at some point. Right now the SOx are doing decent. It's not Farrells fault Kimbrell gave up 3 saves, Price had 2 lousy starts, Buch is a mess and Betts started slow...... However, he is KILLING the BP right now. I hope to God that Smith comes back soon and Kelly when healthy goes to the BP where I said he should be when we first got him in trade.....

[sk7326]

I think he's understating the manager's job. Many people do, in my opinion.

 

I think a lot of guys still think the job is like the managers in the movies. I think in 2016, it is a much more corporate gig and the guys who can work that part as well as the baseball are a much more exclusive set. The combination of media relations, executing organizational strategy, managing a coaching staff ... in addition to the stuff in the dugouts during those 3 or so hour a night ... that is a really complex deal.

[a700hitter]

It does - in so far that it is a real job that some people do better than others. I live outside of DC, so I got to witness the Matt Williams experience up close. It'd be nice to have a guy who has at least managed somewhere professionally. (Gabe Kapler would be another really good candidate)

 

For this job in particular, a true first timer would be hard to work with. Francona had a perfect storm of qualifications - that doesn't happen every day.

There are 30 managerial positions, tons of candidates and yet mosst of the postions are filled with people who just aren't very bright or good managers of people.

[User Name]

Filling up a lineup card and switching pitchers around is not rocket science. Managing the egos of 25 millionaires (a significant portion of whom are pampered brats), corporate interests, and a cutthroat media establishment is not for those with low intelligence.