Referendum on John Farrell

[User Name]

You are running counter to what television IS. If you are analyzing plays and strategy - at some point that SHOULD come into second-guessing ... that's the whole point.

 

But why let common sense get in the way of a good argument?

[Spudboy]

You think Lou Merloni, Dennis Eckersley and Jerry Remy are ignorant? Those guys have forgotten more baseball than we'll ever know. They criticize specific decisions to create commentary for us, the viewing (or listening) audience, and are rarely wrong. Give it a rest.

 

Amen. And they do it in a "matter of fact way", not with malice or with an agenda.

[a700hitter]

Yes, pinchrunning with Wright was a mistake, and there have no doubt been 2 or 3 others, but overall the decision-making has been rational.

It took a while for you to realize this obviously asinine bad and costly move. You might have missed a few others.

[Bellhorn04]

Amen. And they do it in a "matter of fact way", not with malice or with an agenda.

 

Eckersley and Remy I would agree with. Merloni acts more like a regular old hot-headed fan IMO.

[Spudboy]

Eckersley and Remy I would agree with. Merloni acts more like a regular old hot-headed fan IMO.

 

Yes, I can see that. But his views are valid and backed by his depth of knowledge.

 

He's from Framing ham. What else would you expect?

[mvp 78]

Yes, I can see that. But his views are valid and backed by his depth of knowledge.

 

He's from Framing ham. What else would you expect?

 

The real difference: Merloni is on WEEI, Eck and Remy are on NESN. I'm sure NESN tries to wrangle their guys in a little bit and Merloni is just really shooting for ratings sometimes.

[Maxbialystock]

It took a while for you to realize this obviously asinine bad and costly move. You might have missed a few others.

 

Don't agree with the word asinine, do agree it took me quite awhile to agree on Wright. "A few others" is in the eye of the beholder. You seem to think that the bullpen can do no wrong and that it's the manager who simply failed to use the right guys at the right time. I see a very inconsistent bullpen in addition to a manager with a wealth of information/stats, constant up close observation of his players/pitchers, and two good advisers--Lovullo and the pitching coach--with whom to consult well in advance of any pitching changes. Your rule seems to be, "if the Sox lost, it must be Farrell's fault." Mine is, "if the Sox lost, the players weren't hitting or the pitchers weren't pitching or errors were committed or 2 out of 3."

 

I normally accept all managerial in-game decisions but hold managers, Farrell included, accountable for overall wins and losses. On July 28 or August 12, I would have been fine with firing Farrell. But I honestly do not sweat the small stuff the way you do. As I recall, you also agonize over "miscalled" balls and strikes, whereas I firmly believe they do not prevent the better team that day from winning, nor do they prevent good pitchers from excelling and weak pitchers from failing.

[mvp 78]

As I recall, you also agonize over "miscalled" balls and strikes, whereas I firmly believe they do not prevent the better team that day from winning, nor do they prevent good pitchers from excelling and weak pitchers from failing.

 

That's because you are a monster.

[Maxbialystock]

You are running counter to what television IS. If you are analyzing plays and strategy - at some point that SHOULD come into second-guessing ... that's the whole point.

 

You're completely right. Criticizing decisions should be a normal part of the game dialogue from the announcers. However, announcers often avoid that because they know the manager or because they don't like confrontation.

[sk7326]

Don't agree with the word asinine, do agree it took me quite awhile to agree on Wright. "A few others" is in the eye of the beholder. You seem to think that the bullpen can do no wrong and that it's the manager who simply failed to use the right guys at the right time. I see a very inconsistent bullpen in addition to a manager with a wealth of information/stats, constant up close observation of his players/pitchers, and two good advisers--Lovullo and the pitching coach--with whom to consult well in advance of any pitching changes. Your rule seems to be, "if the Sox lost, it must be Farrell's fault." Mine is, "if the Sox lost, the players weren't hitting or the pitchers weren't pitching or errors were committed or 2 out of 3."

 

I normally accept all managerial in-game decisions but hold managers, Farrell included, accountable for overall wins and losses. On July 28 or August 12, I would have been fine with firing Farrell. But I honestly do not sweat the small stuff the way you do. As I recall, you also agonize over "miscalled" balls and strikes, whereas I firmly believe they do not prevent the better team that day from winning, nor do they prevent good pitchers from excelling and weak pitchers from failing.

 

Your viewpoint on the manager is fairly sensible - although it is impossible to talk strategy without intersecting with a manager's decisionmaking. That does not extend to balls and strikes of course, since that involves rules enforcement, and basic fairness.

[Maxbialystock]

You are running counter to what television IS. If you are analyzing plays and strategy - at some point that SHOULD come into second-guessing ... that's the whole point.

 

You're completely right. Criticizing decisions should be a normal part of the game dialogue from the announcers. However, announcers often avoid that because they know the manager or because they don't like confrontation or they don't want the owner on their backs.

[sk7326]

You're completely right. Criticizing decisions should be a normal part of the game dialogue from the announcers. However, announcers often avoid that because they know the manager or because they don't like confrontation.

 

That is a different kettle of fish - and you are right about that. Remy I think is very fair - he has gotten lazy since McDonough left, but still good.

[S5Dewey]

That is a different kettle of fish - and you are right about that. Remy I think is very fair - he has gotten lazy since McDonough left, but still good.

 

I'm not sure about McDonough but IMO he has gotten a lot better since Orsillo left - and at the time I was very opposed to Orsillo's leaving. O'Brien seems to have unlocked Jerry's treasure chest of baseball knowledge and given him permission to distribute the knowledge.

[Slasher9]

I'm not sure about McDonough but IMO he has gotten a lot better since Orsillo left - and at the time I was very opposed to Orsillo's leaving. O'Brien seems to have unlocked Jerry's treasure chest of baseball knowledge and given him permission to distribute the knowledge.

 

or maybe Remy realized after how they did Orsillo...the Sox FO would have no issue slitting his throat so he better up his game to keep his job.....they already working in 2 other color guys throughout the season.....

[Maxbialystock]

Your viewpoint on the manager is fairly sensible - although it is impossible to talk strategy without intersecting with a manager's decisionmaking. That does not extend to balls and strikes of course, since that involves rules enforcement, and basic fairness.

 

About balls and strikes: I am simply a strong proponent of having umpires call them and against robots or TV cameras or computers or whatever.

[Slasher9]

i wonder if NY takes so long on reviews to frustrate the fans against technology to prevent us from demanding robot umps.......

[Wade Boggs]

or maybe Remy realized after how they did Orsillo...the Sox FO would have no issue slitting his throat so he better up his game to keep his job.....they already working in 2 other color guys throughout the season.....

 

John Henry talked about having a 3 man booth in the near future.. I think it was in the Sunday Boston Herald or today's herald. He likes all the of them.

[sk7326]

I'm not sure about McDonough but IMO he has gotten a lot better since Orsillo left - and at the time I was very opposed to Orsillo's leaving. O'Brien seems to have unlocked Jerry's treasure chest of baseball knowledge and given him permission to distribute the knowledge.

 

What you have in both cases are national guys who did not need the job per se. And both have watched a lot of baseball and aren't afraid to advance their own opinions - and push a conversation.

 

McDonough was a preferred taste for me since he did the Sox games the way a really smart Red Sox fan from the pre-title years would do it - wry, cynical, but very happy when the Sox proved him wrong.

[sk7326]

i wonder if NY takes so long on reviews to frustrate the fans against technology to prevent us from demanding robot umps.......

 

I am not going to threadjack on that topic - there is a thread which discusses it amply.

[bosoxmal]

[quote name=

 

I normally accept all managerial in-game decisions but hold managers, Farrell included, accountable for overall wins and losses. On July 28 or August 12, I would have been fine with firing Farrell. But I honestly do not sweat the small stuff the way you do. As I recall, you also agonize over "miscalled" balls and strikes, whereas I firmly believe they do not prevent the better team that day from winning, nor do they prevent good pitchers from excelling and weak pitchers from failing.[/quote]

 

Umpires are human. They all miss at least 20 pitches, badly, each night. Big deal. They are not partial to wither team, and I don't think it hardly ever affects the outcome of the game.

[Dojji]

But there are days when one terrible call can completely change the complexion of the game. One example that stands out is Armando Galarraga's lost perfect game. Another, is when an entire World Series turned around in 1985 based on a blown call at first base. I'm not sure if there's any situation where one blown strike-or-ball call has turned a season on its head, but mathematically speaking it could certainly happen.

[sk7326]

Umpires are human. They all miss at least 20 pitches, badly, each night. Big deal. They are not partial to wither team, and I don't think it hardly ever affects the outcome of the game.

 

It impacts both teams equally which is the saving grace. At the same time - the technology is there to fix it easily (or to really help) - and what you have now is umps going after players and showing them up - when often they are uncontroversially wrong without any way to fix it.

 

Given the huge marginal differences in BA based on count - the mistakes make significant differences, all the time ...

[oldtimer]

Looking at today's game in the 8th with substitute runner JBJ on first and no outs and Hill up with a 3 run lead, why not bunt? Seems like a 4th run would be extremely valuable. Instead of offering at a bunt, Hill takes 2 strikes and then hits into a double play. I realize it is a manager's choice, but given Hill's meager hitting, it would seem a smarter move.

[Bellhorn04]

Looking at today's game in the 8th with substitute runner JBJ on first and no outs and Hill up with a 3 run lead, why not bunt? Seems like a 4th run would be extremely valuable. Instead of offering at a bunt, Hill takes 2 strikes and then hits into a double play. I realize it is a manager's choice, but given Hill's meager hitting, it would seem a smarter move.

 

Hill wouldn't even get the start if they didn't think he could hit lefties though. It's a good spot to let him swing away and maybe get him going. IMO

[sk7326]

Looking at today's game in the 8th with substitute runner JBJ on first and no outs and Hill up with a 3 run lead, why not bunt? Seems like a 4th run would be extremely valuable. Instead of offering at a bunt, Hill takes 2 strikes and then hits into a double play. I realize it is a manager's choice, but given Hill's meager hitting, it would seem a smarter move.

 

take yourself out of a chance to put up a crooked number? no thanks.

[southpaw777]

Kimmi makes a great point about Dombrowski--he travels with the team and must know the kind of job Farrell is doing.

 

If the guys in the booth are criticizing specific moves, to me they are just showing their ignorance. Yes, pinchrunning with Wright was a mistake, and there have no doubt been 2 or 3 others, but overall the decision-making has been rational.

 

Southpaw777 says Farrell was a good pitching coach but is not a good manager, but 90% of the criticism is about pitching changes. As someone quoted Whitey Herzog, "the difference between a great manager and a lousy one is a great bullpen"--or something like that.

 

I have my opinion and im sticking with it...being a pitching coach and a manager are totally different. I think hes been put in some tough situations this year, but I also think hes put his team in some tough situations. More than Id like to see my manager do. No, I dont think hes has done a good job managing his pitching staff, especially the bullpen.

ive never complained about a manager as much as i have with farrell, and I usually don't really complain much at all when it comes to managers. It is what it is...i dont blame him for everything, but when he makes some obvious bonehead moves ill say what I think.

We will have to agree to disagree on this matter. I dont want him here next year no matter what.

[oldtimer]

take yourself out of a chance to put up a crooked number? no thanks.

 

We disagree on this one. When you have a chance to put up a run for a 4 run lead, and you can also avoid a DP situation I would go for the insurance run. I believe it is situational and in this case, the situation favored the bunt. Now if major league players could only bunt.

[S5Dewey]

We disagree on this one. When you have a chance to put up a run for a 4 run lead, and you can also avoid a DP situation I would go for the insurance run. I believe it is situational and in this case, the situation favored the bunt. Now if major league players could only bunt.

 

This is the true issue. People talk about bunting as if it's a sure-fire successful thing. It's not. There's a lot that can go wrong with a bunt. I don't have any numbers on the success rate of bunts but I'd be surprised if it's much more than 60% mostly because too many ML'ers can't bunt.

[User Name]

If they don't know how to bunt, why would you make them?

[sk7326]

We disagree on this one. When you have a chance to put up a run for a 4 run lead, and you can also avoid a DP situation I would go for the insurance run. I believe it is situational and in this case, the situation favored the bunt. Now if major league players could only bunt.

 

The situations where bunting (as a sacrifice, not as an attempt to hit) and intentionally walking guys are way, way, way, WAY smaller than the world seems to think.