Referendum on John Farrell

[Nick]

It took a perfect throw to get Betts.....just saying

[Slasher9]

i dont think Betts trying to steal a base in a close game is ever a bad thing.

[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.

 

I thought I'd restart this thread by dredging up the OP and reminding everyone that, while I will defend specific decisions by Farrell, I do think managers are ultimately accountable for the overall performance of their teams. Right now the Sox have the biggest margin of runs scored vs. runs against of any team in the AL, but they continue to struggle, especially against good pitching and even when it isn't that good. They have a losing record in June. Injuries have not hurt this team because the best pitchers and hitters have for the most part been available when needed.

 

So have at it.

[southpaw777]

I still think he mis uses his pitchers. Theres numerous examples...and for christ sakes stop hitting for Travis Shaw..He hits LHP very good!!!! Its like hes friggin OCD and HAS to hit a RHH against a LHP...jesus, not everyone sucks at hitting the same side pitcher.

My vote, no matter the outcome of the season, is to let him go at the end of the year. Either put him in the FO or just say goodbye.

IMHO, Hes NOT a good in game manager.

[User Name]

Travis Shaw has a .597 OPS against lefties. If that's "very good" then the standards for productive offensive numbers have lowered significantly.

[southpaw777]

Travis Shaw has a .597 OPS against lefties. If that's "very good" then the standards for productive offensive numbers have lowered significantly.

 

went 2-3 vs Sale..a sidewinding LHP. He can hit LHP and theres no reason to hit for him...

He was hitting them fine since the start of the season. But farrell started hitting for him to get young ABs...theres a reason everyone was upset when he would Ph for him...

[User Name]

went 2-3 vs Sale..a sidewinding LHP. He can hit LHP and theres no reason to hit for him...

He was hitting them fine since the start of the season. But farrell started hitting for him to get young ABs...theres a reason everyone was upset when he would Ph for him...

 

The two hits against Sale don't change the fact that he's been terrible against lefties this year. They have his number.

[Bellhorn04]

Interesting thing about pinch hitting, and this isn't aimed at Farrell, but it usually fails. Red Sox pinch hitters have an OPS of .487. AL pinch hitters have an OPS of .612.

[southpaw777]

The two hits against Sale don't change the fact that he's been terrible against lefties this year. They have his number.

 

Hes always had good splits vs LHP...just because hes in a little slump this month doesn't mean anything..

Hes a career 280 BA with a 833OPs vs LHP

He shouldnt be PH for

Maybe he needs to make some adjustments like most young guys once MLB pitchers start to figure him out. Hes proved he can hit LHP so Phing for him, to me, is dumb. Let him make those adjustments. He cant do that from the bench..

Edited June 23, 2016 by southpaw777

[User Name]

Hes always had good splits vs LHP...just because hes in a little slump this month doesn't mean anything..

Hes a career 280 BA with a 833OPs vs LHP

He shouldnt be PH for

Maybe he needs to make some adjustments like most young guys once MLB pitchers start to figure him out. Hes proved he can hit LHP so Phing for him, to me, is dumb. Let him make those adjustments. He cant do that from the bench..

 

In the meantime, he's hitting like a pitcher against lefties. That's an undeniable fact.

[southpaw777]

Agreed.Im not arguing his slump hes been in....but he needs to be allowed to work out of it.

[illinoisredsox]

I still think he mis uses his pitchers. Theres numerous examples...and for christ sakes stop hitting for Travis Shaw..He hits LHP very good!!!! Its like hes friggin OCD and HAS to hit a RHH against a LHP...jesus, not everyone sucks at hitting the same side pitcher.

My vote, no matter the outcome of the season, is to let him go at the end of the year. Either put him in the FO or just say goodbye.

IMHO, Hes NOT a good in game manager.

 

Let's not pretend hitting for Shaw is an everyday occurrence, nor is he sitting against all lefties. He has played in every game the Sox have played this year (71), and has started 68 of them. Shaw has been pinch hit for 6 times this year, with 4 of those in the first 10 days of the season. Since then, the ONLY times he has been hit for were on June 14th (Rutledge) against the O's Zach Britton (this one was questionable since it was Rutledge) and Monday against Duke (Pedroia). The latter I can understand since Duke does appear to be very tough on lefties and you had a .300 hitter in Pedroia available. He was not hit for last night, he came out because the ankle was bothering him from fouling a pitch off of it on Tuesday.

 

No matter how you want to spin it, the facts are that this year he is hitting lefties to the tune of .204 with and OBP of .250 and a slugging percentage of .347 and that includes the 3 hits over the past 2 games.. Yes he hit them well last year (in 85 plate appearances). He has not hit them well this year (in 52 plate appearances).

 

Now I will agree there are definitely better in game managers.

Edited June 23, 2016 by illinoisredsox

[illinoisredsox]

Interesting thing about pinch hitting, and this isn't aimed at Farrell, but it usually fails. Red Sox pinch hitters have an OPS of .487. AL pinch hitters have an OPS of .612.

 

It is interesting. I'd would think that the teams that have a higher OPS for their pinch hitters also employ platoons to a fairly large extent, so that players are actually hitting on a fairly regular basis. Definitely cannot be said of the Red Sox this year or most years.

 

When Rutledge hit for Shaw against Britton a week or so ago, it was his first PA this month. Hitting maybe once a week is not going to lead to great results.

Edited June 23, 2016 by illinoisredsox

[devildavid]

In this case a successful bunt would have brought in a run, so it's a little more defensible.

 

Not defensible when the batter is not a good bunter. In general, bunting is a wasted at bat unless you have a batter who is a wizard at it. Not too many players like that anymore. Just swing away and take your chances.

[devildavid]

I have no problem with Mookie trying to steal there. It's never good when they get caught, but the team's success rate has been very good.

 

Hanley getting picked off was really a bonehead move. I'm pretty sure that I read somewhere that he leads the league in outs made on the basepaths by 4 or 5. Not good.

 

In that game, every base runner was very important. Success rate or not, the game was one that required a conservative approach. The Sox gave away too many baserunners who potentially could have scored if they took a patient approach. Now granted, they won the game, but I still question those moves.

[mvp 78]

Where would this team be without Farrell?!? You can't let a guy like THAT get away.

[Bellhorn04]

Not defensible when the batter is not a good bunter. In general, bunting is a wasted at bat unless you have a batter who is a wizard at it. Not too many players like that anymore. Just swing away and take your chances.

 

And maybe hit into an inning-ending double play with Betts up next.

[devildavid]

And maybe hit into an inning-ending double play with Betts up next.

 

That's a better baseball risk than bunting which is akin to giving the other team a free out. My wife hates bunting even more than I do. We were both at the game saying no, don't bunt, once we saw him square away.

[Bellhorn04]

That's a better baseball risk than bunting which is akin to giving the other team a free out.

 

No, it really isn't. You're biased because of your general aversion to bunting.

[devildavid]

No, it really isn't. You're biased because of your general aversion to bunting.

 

I would be ok with bunting in very select situations if there were any players who could execute it properly. Even in the days of skilled bunters there were always those hitters who you would be best served having swing away.

 

I'm mostly a Farrell defender but there are times he is too much by the traditional baseball book and other times too much trying to force the issue.

[southpaw777]

WTF is everyone bunting all of a sudden for?!?! You want to just give them an out? Guys are bunting that shouldnt be bunting!!!

All the fans who wanted the small ball BS, well there ya go! Hows that working out?

Swing the damn bat!!!!

I hope thats not Farrell calling for all these dumb ass bunts....or even some of them. UGH....

And can someone remind Butter than not everyone should be sent home everytime...Sending Papi on a shallow fly was one of thee dumbest calls Ive seen in a long time. I understand being aggressive. But theres a fine line between that and stupidity...

[Bellhorn04]

I would be ok with bunting in very select situations if there were any players who could execute it properly. Even in the days of skilled bunters there were always those hitters who you would be best served having swing away.

 

I'm mostly a Farrell defender but there are times he is too much by the traditional baseball book and other times too much trying to force the issue.

 

B-R tells me Vazquez had 3 successful sac bunts in 2014, so he has at least demonstrated some capacity to get it done.

 

I'm not a big fan of bunting either, believe me. But in that particular situation it may have been the right call.

 

I'd like to let Kimmi make the final ruling on this one...because she knows all the research stuff that's been done on bunting.

[S5Dewey]

How did this become an all-or-none thing with bunting? Of course there are times when a player should be bunting, just as there are times - and players - when bunting is not a good idea.

 

Anyone who followed me 'over there' knows of my disdain for giving up 1/3 of an inning just to move a runner up a base, however, there are no hard rules for it. It's a situational thing.

 

Generally speaking I think bunting is a bad idea for the Red Sox because bunting is usually done in an attempt to generate one run. Day in, day out, this team's pitching staff is so bad and the offense is so good that the one run that's generated (IF it's successful) isn't going to make a difference. Generally speaking, I'll take my chances with getting the base hit or the extra-base hit, but there are situations, usually late in the game, where one run is needed for a win. It's situational.

[User Name]

In a walk-off situation, I'll bunt a guy from second to third with no out if the hitter is a good bunter.

[Maxbialystock]

Bill James and sabermetrics say bunting is bad and a wasted at bat, but plenty of teams use bunts well. The problem for the Sox is they don't have any reliable bunters because they don't practice it. The NL generally is better at bunting if only because they will often have pitchers bunt if there is a man on first.

 

I like the bunt, not so much because it's a good tactic, but because it's an interesting play and places demands on the batter and the infield you don't see that often.

[Kimmi]

B-R tells me Vazquez had 3 successful sac bunts in 2014, so he has at least demonstrated some capacity to get it done.

 

I'm not a big fan of bunting either, believe me. But in that particular situation it may have been the right call.

 

I'd like to let Kimmi make the final ruling on this one...because she knows all the research stuff that's been done on bunting.

 

IMO, Vazquez bunting in that situation is certainly defensible, as you said. It was late in the game (8th inning), we were ahead 2-1 and looking for and insurance run, and we had a weak bat at the plate bunting to get to the top of the order. Also, Vazquez has had some success with laying down a sac bunt.

 

Was it the right call? I don't know. I think it's pretty much a 50-50 call in that particular situation. But again, certainly defensible. It looked bad because he failed miserably, but lack of execution does not equate to it being bad call.

 

Personally, I would have preferred him swinging away because he did not necessarily need a hit to score the run, but as you said, he might have just as easily hit into a double play.

[Kimmi]

Sac bunting is still very much misused. Sac bunting should only be used:

 

1. Late in the game - 8th inning or later, in very rare cases, maybe in the 7th

2. There's a runner on 2nd base, at least. With a runner on 1st only, with no outs, DO NOT BUNT!

3. Scoring one run is vital.

 

Even if all of the above are true, whether to bunt or not depends on the players involved. You would not have Papi bunting, for instance.

[mvp 78]

My new policy platform: Save the bunt, kill the win!

[mvp 78]

Some on here have said that the team's record is a direct reflection of the manager. Well, can I blame the june swoon on him or does he only get credit for April and May?

[bosoxmal]

Pedroia will make a good manager some day. And this may shock some people, but I think Ortiz would also. Most likely scenario: Farrell will move to the front office in November, and Veritek will be the new manager.