Referendum on John Farrell

[Bellhorn04]

it is perfect logic. I can't help that you can't process it. The team lost so Farrell's moves didn't work. What we don't know for sure is whether the team would have won if he had gone to the pen earlier. We do know that the outcome could not have been worse if he had. We also saw demonstrated last night the proper way to manage the late innings. A single by the #9 hitter prompted the Seattle manager to go to the pen with a 3-0 lead in the 8th inning with 1 out and iwakima was at 97 pitches. He didn't let circumstances spin out of control.

 

It's probably worth mentioning that the same Seattle manager had blown a game against the Cubs only 2 days earlier, bringing Cishek in for the 9th with a 3 run lead, and leaving him in for 8 batters and 3 runs, giving up 3 hits, a hit batter and a wild pitch.

 

Just so no one gets the impression the Seattle manager is smart either...

[a700hitter]

It's probably worth mentioning that the same Seattle manager had blown a game against the Cubs only 2 days earlier, bringing Cishek in for the 9th with a 3 run lead, and leaving him in for 8 batters and 3 runs, giving up 3 hits, a hit batter and a wild pitch.

 

Just so no one gets the impression the Seattle manager is smart either...

You know my opinion of managerial intelligence.

 

BTW I have heard and read various estimates of the value that a manager brings to a team. What is the "consensus" as to how many wins a good manager is worth?

[illinoisredsox]

You know my opinion of managerial intelligence.

 

BTW I have heard and read various estimates of the value that a manager brings to a team. What is the "consensus" as to how many wins a good manager is worth?

 

I've seen some that say MAYBE 3 or 4

 

But Sparky Anderson, who knew a few things about winning, had a few very quotes on the subject that I think are pretty accurate:

 

"Baseball is a simple game. If you have good players and if you keep them in the right frame of mind, then the manager is a success."

 

"I don't believe a manager ever won a pennant. Casey Stengel won all those pennants with the Yankees. How many did he win with the Boston Braves and Mets? I've never seen a team win a pennant without players. I think the only thing the manager has to do is keep things within certain boundaries."

 

"If a team is in a positive frame of mind, it will have a good attitude. If it has a good attitude, it will make a commitment to playing the game right. If it plays the game right, it will win—unless, of course, it doesn't have enough talent to win, and no manager can make goose-liver pate out of goose feathers, so why worry?"

[Spudboy]

I'm not really blaming last night's loss on Farrell. What's more concerning is that the team is 26-28 since June 1.

 

about .500

[Spudboy]

it is perfect logic. I can't help that you can't process it. The team lost so Farrell's moves didn't work. What we don't know for sure is whether the team would have won if he had gone to the pen earlier. We do know that the outcome could not have been worse if he had. We also saw demonstrated last night the proper way to manage the late innings. A single by the #9 hitter prompted the Seattle manager to go to the pen with a 3-0 lead in the 8th inning with 1 out and iwakima was at 97 pitches. He didn't let circumstances spin out of control.

 

Amen.

 

Sometimes a quick hook is the way to go.

[a700hitter]

I've seen some that say MAYBE 3 or 4

 

But Sparky Anderson, who knew a few things about winning, had a few very quotes on the subject that I think are pretty accurate:

 

"Baseball is a simple game. If you have good players and if you keep them in the right frame of mind, then the manager is a success."

 

"I don't believe a manager ever won a pennant. Casey Stengel won all those pennants with the Yankees. How many did he win with the Boston Braves and Mets? I've never seen a team win a pennant without players. I think the only thing the manager has to do is keep things within certain boundaries."

 

"If a team is in a positive frame of mind, it will have a good attitude. If it has a good attitude, it will make a commitment to playing the game right. If it plays the game right, it will win—unless, of course, it doesn't have enough talent to win, and no manager can make goose-liver pate out of goose feathers, so why worry?"

I have seen estimates ranging from +/- 2 to 5 games. Since their impact is negligible, why do they get paid so much. No manager is worth millions/year. And why is there such reluctance to fire them. It seems to me that they can be discarded like tissue paper without it making much of a difference.

[illinoisredsox]

I'm not really blaming last night's loss on Farrell. What's more concerning is that the team is 26-28 since June 1.

 

Most clubs, even championship ones, have stretches like that:

 

The 2004 Sox got off to a hot start, but then went 27-30 in May and June (and 41-42 from May through July)

 

The 2007 team had a great April and May, but went 28-26 from June 1-July 31 and 44-39 from May through August.

 

Now who knows with this club. Let's face it, after the past couple years, to even be worried about a .500 stretch on this date is a big step forward.

[a700hitter]

Most clubs, even championship ones, have stretches like that:

 

The 2004 Sox got off to a hot start, but then went 27-30 in May and June (and 41-42 from May through July)

 

The 2007 team had a great April and May, but went 28-26 from June 1-July 31 and 44-39 from May through August.

 

Now who knows with this club. Let's face it, after the past couple years, to even be worried about a .500 stretch on this date is a big step forward.

I am enjoying this season. It is nice to have meaningful games in August as opposed to the last 2 seasons.

[Bellhorn04]

I have seen estimates ranging from +/- 2 to 5 games. Since their impact is negligible, why do they get paid so much. No manager is worth millions/year. And why is there such reluctance to fire them. It seems to me that they can be discarded like tissue paper without it making much of a difference.

 

A difference of 2 games a year is actually worth a pile of money.

[a700hitter]

A difference of 2 games a year is actually worth a pile of money.

But are managerial results consistent? I doubt it.

[illinoisredsox]

I have seen estimates ranging from +/- 2 to 5 games. Since their impact is negligible, why do they get paid so much. No manager is worth millions/year. And why is there such reluctance to fire them. It seems to me that they can be discarded like tissue paper without it making much of a difference.

 

I think the corollary question is more apropos: how many games can a bad manager cost his team? I think the number there is a lot higher than the number that a good manager can get is team.

[a700hitter]

If they are fluctuating between +2 and -2 from year to year, they are not worth much at all.

[cp176]

I've seen some that say MAYBE 3 or 4

 

But Sparky Anderson, who knew a few things about winning, had a few very quotes on the subject that I think are pretty accurate:

 

"Baseball is a simple game. If you have good players and if you keep them in the right frame of mind, then the manager is a success."

 

"I don't believe a manager ever won a pennant. Casey Stengel won all those pennants with the Yankees. How many did he win with the Boston Braves and Mets? I've never seen a team win a pennant without players. I think the only thing the manager has to do is keep things within certain boundaries."

 

"If a team is in a positive frame of mind, it will have a good attitude. If it has a good attitude, it will make a commitment to playing the game right. If it plays the game right, it will win—unless, of course, it doesn't have enough talent to win, and no manager can make goose-liver pate out of goose feathers, so why worry?"

 

up where I come from, we just say - can't make chicken salad out of chicken s***! A good coach will do a lot to stay out of the way. If the players are actually good, overcoaching can be much more hurtful than undercoaching.

[Bellhorn04]

I have seen estimates ranging from +/- 2 to 5 games. Since their impact is negligible, why do they get paid so much. No manager is worth millions/year. And why is there such reluctance to fire them. It seems to me that they can be discarded like tissue paper without it making much of a difference.

 

That would suggest that Farrell is no different from Francona and Francona is no different from Grady Little or Butch Hobson. I think I'd take Francona.

[a700hitter]

That would suggest that Farrell is no different from Francona and Francona is no different from Grady Little or Butch Hobson. I think I'd take Francona.

There are certain outliers. On the bad side, you have Hobson who was a drugged up moron. On the good side you have Sparky Andersen, Earl Weaver and LaRussa. Everyone else is in between, so I would lump Farrell and Tito and Grady and Joe Morgan and Johnny Mac all together. To me they are basically interchangeable regarding their effect on the standings.

[Kimmi]

it is perfect logic. I can't help that you can't process it. The team lost so Farrell's moves didn't work. What we don't know for sure is whether the team would have won if he had gone to the pen earlier. We do know that the outcome could not have been worse if he had. We also saw demonstrated last night the proper way to manage the late innings. A single by the #9 hitter prompted the Seattle manager to go to the pen with a 3-0 lead in the 8th inning with 1 out and iwakima was at 97 pitches. He didn't let circumstances spin out of control.

 

Saying that Farrell's moves didn't work is one thing. That's kind of obvious.

 

Saying that Farrell's moves were wrong because the team lost is something entirely different, and incorrect. That would be like saying that it was wrong to have Papi in the line up every game the team lost.

 

Just because a move does not work does not mean it was the wrong move. And just because a move works does not mean that it was the right move.

[Kimmi]

I've seen some that say MAYBE 3 or 4

 

But Sparky Anderson, who knew a few things about winning, had a few very quotes on the subject that I think are pretty accurate:

 

"Baseball is a simple game. If you have good players and if you keep them in the right frame of mind, then the manager is a success."

 

"I don't believe a manager ever won a pennant. Casey Stengel won all those pennants with the Yankees. How many did he win with the Boston Braves and Mets? I've never seen a team win a pennant without players. I think the only thing the manager has to do is keep things within certain boundaries."

 

"If a team is in a positive frame of mind, it will have a good attitude. If it has a good attitude, it will make a commitment to playing the game right. If it plays the game right, it will win—unless, of course, it doesn't have enough talent to win, and no manager can make goose-liver pate out of goose feathers, so why worry?"

 

I appreciate these quotes.

 

Basically, they are saying that managing the players and the clubhouse are more important than the in game decisions, which has always been my opinion.

[Bellhorn04]

I appreciate these quotes.

 

Basically, they are saying that managing the players and the clubhouse are more important than the in game decisions, which has always been my opinion.

 

I agree that managing the players and the clubhouse are more important, but I disagree with downplaying the impact of the decisions. I think the Aug. 2 game is a good example of the array of decisions the manager can be faced with. Farrell could have removed Price after 7. He could have removed him after the home run, or one more batter after that, or one more batter after that. He could have stuck with Barnes instead of going to Abad. And whether he was right or wrong, those decisions absolutely have an impact on the outcome.

[Slasher9]

it is perfect logic. I can't help that you can't process it. The team lost so Farrell's moves didn't work. What we don't know for sure is whether the team would have won if he had gone to the pen earlier. We do know that the outcome could not have been worse if he had. We also saw demonstrated last night the proper way to manage the late innings. A single by the #9 hitter prompted the Seattle manager to go to the pen with a 3-0 lead in the 8th inning with 1 out and iwakima was at 97 pitches. He didn't let circumstances spin out of control.

You just defacto compared iwakuma to David price.

This is noted.

[Slasher9]

Amen.

 

Sometimes a quick hook is the way to go.

 

You just compared iwakuma to David price.

Noted.

[moonslav59]

[/b]

You just compared iwakuma to David price.

Noted.

 

yeah, you should 't diss Iwa like that!

 

Lol

[mvp 78]

Iwakuma should have been grabbed rather than taking Buchholz's option.

[Kimmi]

I agree that managing the players and the clubhouse are more important, but I disagree with downplaying the impact of the decisions. I think the Aug. 2 game is a good example of the array of decisions the manager can be faced with. Farrell could have removed Price after 7. He could have removed him after the home run, or one more batter after that, or one more batter after that. He could have stuck with Barnes instead of going to Abad. And whether he was right or wrong, those decisions absolutely have an impact on the outcome.

 

There are no doubt many decisions to be made every game. They all impact a game, but not as much as one would think. Here is what Mitchel Lichtman has to say on the topic:

 

Before you go ballistic when a manager makes a strategic error (you think) and his team loses presumably "because" of it........

 

It takes around 50 to 200 bad manager decisions (bullpen, pinch hitter, IBB, bunt, etc.) before he costs his team ONE win.

 

 

Here is an article that does a good job of explaining the impact of each managerial decision:

 

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2015/10/21/9574081/the-impact-of-managerial-mistakes

 

And the summary of that article if you don't want to read the whole thing:

 

Again, I could keep going, but I hope the point is clear. When this game was happening, these felt like three pivotal decision points, where the game had the potential to be lost or won based in part on mistakes made by the manager. That's technically true, but as these three cases show, it's in very small part. Managerial tactics matter, but not much.

[Bellhorn04]

It takes around 50 to 200 bad manager decisions (bullpen, pinch hitter, IBB, bunt, etc.) before he costs his team ONE win.

 

That's one of the most incredible things I've ever heard.

[Bellhorn04]

If it takes 50 to 200 bad decisions to cost one win, that means that a manager can't actually cost you one individual game, ever. It means Grady leaving Pedro in the game in 2003 had little impact.

[mvp 78]

********

[Redrojo]

********

Double ********!

[StephenCurry30]

So that means Farrell could intentionally walk 45 batters in a row and still do 5 more stupid things before it actually costs the Sox the game. RIGHT ON

[a700hitter]

Saying that Farrell's moves didn't work is one thing. That's kind of obvious.

 

Saying that Farrell's moves were wrong because the team lost is something entirely different, and incorrect. That would be like saying that it was wrong to have Papi in the line up every game the team lost.

 

Just because a move does not work does not mean it was the wrong move. And just because a move works does not mean that it was the right move.

The only way we can know definitively if a move is the right move is if it works. If a move works and has the desired outcome, it can never be considered to be wrong, because it worked. If it doesn't work, it can be up for debate whether an alternate move would have worked.

[a700hitter]

You just defacto compared iwakuma to David price.

This is noted.

No I did not, but nice try.