Referendum on John Farrell

[mvp 78]

Maybe it did matter.

We'll never know.

 

If everybody would agree on those points we'd be done.

 

But let's face it, it's much more fun to keep arguing in an endless loop.

 

They were swept. It's tough to say they would've won if they had HFA. If they made it to game 5 after winning 2 straight at home, maybe the argument could be made.

[mvp 78]

Amazing how he got mysteriously better by the time the playoffs started....what did we save him for? relief gigs? And even if he was hurt why did you start your worst starter and then sub 1/3 of the lineup with back up players? Either way it smells of surrender...and it came back to bite us - facts are facts...

 

This is dumb. He pitched in relief prior to the season ending. He didn't "mysteriously" get better.

[Bellhorn04]

They were swept. It's tough to say they would've won if they had HFA. If they made it to game 5 after winning 2 straight at home, maybe the argument could be made.

 

Agree 100%.

[oldtimer]

Amazing how he got mysteriously better by the time the playoffs started....what did we save him for? relief gigs? And even if he was hurt why did you start your worst starter and then sub 1/3 of the lineup with back up players? Either way it smells of surrender...and it came back to bite us - facts are facts...

 

I wasn't happy with our losing 9 straight. We had a breakdown in our closing pitching, 4 of our hitters were slumping, JF gave away a game, our best starters couldn't get it done and in one game usually reliable players made errors. You can ask why that happened. I don't think there is one answer, such as it was all JF's fault, but I do think he and the coaches contributed. The giveaway game was supposed to set up our pitching going into the playoffs and no doubt JF gave the game away to rest players and set up his pitching. It didn't work but at least there was a reason he did it.

 

The inability of our coaching staff to help JBJ out of his slump, which occurred over a long term is also a mystery to me. It was clear that his swing was not only lengthened but also he began looping it, presumably for more power. Bogaerts was also in a prolonged slump which he finally seemed to be coming off in the last game. Slumps will occur but coaches are there to bring the good hitters back to a norm.

 

Our starting pitching is what it is. Why it should crater at the end is a bit of a mystery, but only Porcello really looked capable of out-dueling the opponent and when he failed we had Price with his poor post-season record and Buchholz who tends to be inconsistent.

 

DD has already stated that JF will be back so despite the feeling maybe a change is in order to freshen the outlook, it will not occur in 2017. It's a choice and the team will live with it so I certainly can.

[a700hitter]

No, the real mistake was winning the division. We would have been better off following the Jays example and being in the Wild Card game. They outfoxed us.

Not a comparable situation. In 2003 Pedro was at 100 pitches after 7 innings and he labored to get out of the 7th and Grady had Tomlin for the 8th and Williamson for the 9th and both had been pitching very well.

 

in 2004, Pedro was at 88 pitches after 5 innings and his biggest pitch inning I think was the 1st. Also, going to the bell pen for 4 innings is much different than going to the set up guy and closer. It just is mot a comparable situation.

[sk7326]

54% vs 46% = advantage - I would take that advantage anyday in any length series. Just enough maybe. That is all anyone could ask for.

 

Your math is wrong. The edge is not remotely that large.

[Dojji]

Amazing how he got mysteriously better by the time the playoffs started....what did we save him for? relief gigs? And even if he was hurt why did you start your worst starter and then sub 1/3 of the lineup with back up players? Either way it smells of surrender...and it came back to bite us - facts are facts...

 

Yes, facts are facts. And the fact is we got beaten by a better team in the playoffs. HFA might have made it a 3-1 series rather than 3-0, but it was hardly the deciding factor in who advanced to the next level.

 

You are making a mountain out of a molehill.

[a700hitter]

Better teams usually get the HFA, so when you don't get it, the odds are against you, because you are probably not the better team. There is no solace to be taken by saying HFA doesn't matter because we are the better team, because you probably are not the better team except when HFA is decided by the All Star game. Losing HFA was an indication that we were not better than Cleveland and not playing in front of the friendly crowd just makes things worse.

[Dojji]

But at the end of the day this franchise knows how to play on the road, so I doubt it was a decisive factor.

[a700hitter]

But at the end of the day this franchise knows how to play on the road, so I doubt it was a decisive factor.

Advantage doesn't equate to decisive factor, but it is helpful. To think otherwise is to put one's head in the sand.

[Dojji]

Agreed, but I'm of the opinion that the team wasn't tanking as badly as some seem to think in those last handful of games. We tanked one game but we had a lot of games where things just stopped working that had been working all year. The team flew apart at the last minute, and personally I chalk it up to inexperience and nerves among the young core.

[illinoisredsox]

Agreed, but I'm of the opinion that the team wasn't tanking as badly as some seem to think in those last handful of games. We tanked one game but we had a lot of games where things just stopped working that had been working all year. The team flew apart at the last minute, and personally I chalk it up to inexperience and nerves among the young core.

 

 

Exactly. For all those who seem to think that the line-up Farrell put out on September 29 somehow screwed up the season, I give you the line-up the Guardians fielded on September 27 (after clinching the AL Central the night before):

 

Tyler Naquin, cf

Michael Martinez, 2B

Abraham Almonte, rf

Carlos Santana, dh

Brandon GUyer, lf

Jesus Aguilar, 1B

Chris Gimenez, 3B

Adam Moore, c

Erik Gonzalez, ss

Mike Clevinger, p

 

I count 3 regulars there. BTW, the Guardians lost 12-0. By any measure, Francona tanked that game. They also lost the next night (with their regular line-up) and at that point had lost 4 of 5. Then it suddenly turned around and they swept KC over the weekend.

 

I didn't bother looking, but it would not shock me to see that every team that clinched something early ran out a second string line-up the day after clinching.

 

What the Red Sox ran into was a team that got hot. They ran into what the Blue Jays, Orioles, Yankees and Rays ran into during the Sox' 11 game winning streak. It happens. We've seen it many times.

Edited October 13, 2016 by illinoisredsox

[sk7326]

Ultimately, baseball is the flukiest of all the major sports on a day to day basis - and why the regular season is the least flukey of all (ironing out those flukes via sheer number of games). But it follows the playoffs are the flukiest of the pro sports. (NBA > NFL > NHL > MLB ... in terms of level of certainty and the likelihood the champ is in fact the "best"). The only real conclusion that comes from why they lost is that the Guardians outscored them in three games.

 

It's no solace - but hard to call for anybody's head over it either.

[Spudboy]

An advantage... even when teased out.

 

And more to your overall point, a team should never, ever, take the foot off the pedal when in the quest for a tittle.

 

Entering the playoffs flat a team "defeats it's own purpose".

[Spudboy]

play the percentages, hope for the best ...

 

Play to win every f***ing game!!!

 

To do anything less is antithetical.

[Spudboy]

Well it did end badly as my thread suggested it would and now you're all debating whether home field advantage would have mattered. I see some people are still in denial. You honestly believe that the Guardians would have swept the Sox at Fenway the first two games? This year of all years given the Papi swan song? The emotional tenor of the opening game in Boston would have impacted it significantly imo. Having said that I was amused to hear all these people ready to jump off the Tobin Bridge because Farrell is coming back. He is a product of the Theo/Tito school of playoff thinking that says just GET into the playoffs (remember a wild card was as good as a division winner for them). They played so poorly at the end I have no idea why they thought they would just turn it around against a playoff team in their ball park. That was JF's big mistake, not the in-game managing. Besides the desperation move of pinch hitting his two best hitters in the series the final game and leaving his worst in, there was little he could do. I suggested that Price should've been used in game 1 and Porcello in game two matched with their ace. You just wanted to get out of there with one win. Both of these guys failed. Starting Buch was a mistake because we played scared the entire time (pulling him in the 4th???) Not the way you want to start an elimination game. The irony is that as shaky as Clay was, he was still better than our two studs. Looks like that heckler guy was right - all we had to do was play .500 ball at the end and we would have had the HFA - that is totally on JF. Starting Owen with three subs? he just threw that game away and that came back to haunt us. Sometimes the manager/organization just get it wrong. Case in point, last year's Patriots. Maybe next year we will finally learn that there is no time to relax in a pennant race.

 

This is actually a prime example of how not playing to win can bite a team in the ass entering the playoffs.

[mvp 78]

This is actually a prime example of how not playing to win can bite a team in the ass entering the playoffs.

 

But they did beat the Chiefs prior to losing to the Broncos. Maybe the Broncos were just a better team?

[sk7326]

Play to win every f***ing game!!!

 

To do anything less is antithetical.

 

The players that went out there certainly did.

 

The Patriots example is less interesting as Julian Edelman And Gronk's ailments were hard to deal with in an alternate way - and the bye was clinched (and they had blown a game they should have won in Denver during the season). Home field means considerably more in football - but the Patriots healthwise were probably not in a position to do much in Week 17 other than what actually happened.

[Slasher9]

Better teams usually get the HFA, so when you don't get it, the odds are against you, because you are probably not the better team. There is no solace to be taken by saying HFA doesn't matter because we are the better team, because you probably are not the better team except when HFA is decided by the All Star game. Losing HFA was an indication that we were not better than Cleveland and not playing in front of the friendly crowd just makes things worse.

 

what is clevelands 2016 home record?

what is clevelands 2016 road record?

[Slasher9]

But at the end of the day this franchise knows how to play on the road, so I doubt it was a decisive factor.

 

you realize 2 teams play a game, yes?

what was clevelands home record?

what was clevelands road record?

 

to say HFA against the 2016 cleveland Guardians is not important is being naive.

[Slasher9]

Agreed, but I'm of the opinion that the team wasn't tanking as badly as some seem to think in those last handful of games. We tanked one game but we had a lot of games where things just stopped working that had been working all year. The team flew apart at the last minute, and personally I chalk it up to inexperience and nerves among the young core.

 

i chalk it up to the David Ortiz Retirement Tour. it took over the last week of the season and distracted from what the focus should have been - winning a WS.

[Slasher9]

But they did beat the Chiefs prior to losing to the Broncos. Maybe the Broncos were just a better team?

 

one was at home. one was on the road.

[mvp 78]

what is clevelands 2016 home record?

what is clevelands 2016 road record?

 

Their road record in the playoffs was 1-0. Even if the Sox had HFA and took two out three, they still lost two games in Cleveland and one game at home.

[mvp 78]

one was at home. one was on the road.

 

Maybe the Broncos were just a better team?

[Spudboy]

But they did beat the Chiefs prior to losing to the Broncos. Maybe the Broncos were just a better team?

 

Meh. I can't say one way or another with any conviction. The Bronco's D was pretty good.

 

I would have like our chances at home.

[Spudboy]

The players that went out there certainly did.

 

The Patriots example is less interesting as Julian Edelman And Gronk's ailments were hard to deal with in an alternate way - and the bye was clinched (and they had blown a game they should have won in Denver during the season). Home field means considerably more in football - but the Patriots healthwise were probably not in a position to do much in Week 17 other than what actually happened.

 

The Pats were banged up. But they game planed not to lose instead of game planned to win. That was obvious.

 

Had they won out they would have had HFA as I recall.

 

But hey, in BB I trust.

[Bellhorn04]

you realize 2 teams play a game, yes?

what was clevelands home record?

what was clevelands road record?

 

to say HFA against the 2016 cleveland Guardians is not important is being naive.

 

Nah, we were a great road team, especially at the end of the year. And we won 2 out of 3 in Cleveland this year.

 

Case closed.

[Bellhorn04]

Not a comparable situation. In 2003 Pedro was at 100 pitches after 7 innings and he labored to get out of the 7th and Grady had Tomlin for the 8th and Williamson for the 9th and both had been pitching very well.

 

in 2004, Pedro was at 88 pitches after 5 innings and his biggest pitch inning I think was the 1st. Also, going to the bell pen for 4 innings is much different than going to the set up guy and closer. It just is mot a comparable situation.

 

It was comparable in the sense of leaving the guy in there too long with the season on the line. I can't believe you weren't screaming at the TV for Tito to get Pedro out of there at over 100 pitches and Matsui up with a chance to make the game 7-2.

[sk7326]

The Pats were banged up. But they game planed not to lose instead of game planned to win. That was obvious.

 

Had they won out they would have had HFA as I recall.

 

But hey, in BB I trust.

 

They would have - what I do not remember was the win scenario, and their focus was clearly on getting healthy ... I suspect if their guys were 100% they might have pushed harder. It was a risk - and one which was a missed extra point from possibly paying off. C'est la vie.

[a700hitter]

It was comparable in the sense of leaving the guy in there too long with the season on the line. I can't believe you weren't screaming at the TV for Tito to get Pedro out of there at over 100 pitches and Matsui up with a chance to make the game 7-2.

it wasn't comparable at all. In 2003, Pedro had performed to plan-- 7 solid inning with a lead and 100 pitches. The formula all season long was to go to the pen to lock it down. Pedro had taken his congratulations. That was much different from 2004 where Pedro had entered the 6th inning with only 88 pitches and the issue was whether he stayed in one batter too long. The call in 2003 was much easier. Pedro clearly should not have been sent to the mound in the 8 th inning. That had bee the winning strategy during the season. You are just perpetuating the argument with this and sending it into a circle jerk.