Farrell

[Maxbialystock]

I blame Farrell for this thread.

 

A lot of truth in that.

[Bellhorn04]

I think Farrell's big mistake yesterday was not pinch hitting for Marrero with the bases loaded and 1 out in the eight. That made no sense.

 

Marrero was left in the game for the same reason he started the game - our atrocious third base defense.

[Fisk]

Marrero was left in the game for the same reason he started the game - our atrocious third base defense.

 

Had a chance to blow the game wide open with Bradley and Rutledge sitting on the bench, was not a good decision. The reason he started was to get a day of rest for Rutledge.

[Bellhorn04]

Had a chance to blow the game wide open with Bradley and Rutledge sitting on the bench, was not a good decision. The reason he started was to get a day of rest for Rutledge.

 

Rutledge hasn't exactly been picking it.

[Fisk]

His hitting compared to Marreros is quite the difference. When you can't hit above 200 in Pawtucket you should not get that at bat. Plus they also had D'arnaud on the bench who could have played third.

[Kimmi]

Bringing your closer in with the tying run on third and one out in the 8th is more of a desperation move than it is a real game plan. Fortunately , Kimbrel was up to the task. Such a shame that we "overpaid " for him.

 

1. Desperation move? I don't think so, because I think it's the right move. It might seem desperate to you because it's not something that most managers would do, but the reason for not doing it is because it goes against the 'norm'.

 

2. We most definitely overpaid for Kimbrel. Doesn't mean that I'm not happy to have him.

[Kimmi]

As Leo Durocher said, "Don't save a pitcher for tomorrow. It might rain tomorrow."

 

To paraphrase that, 'Don 't save your closer for the 9th. You may be behind in the 9th.'

 

Exactly. You don't want to lose a game while you're best reliever/player sits on the bench waiting for an opportunity that never comes.

[S5Dewey]

Exactly. You don't want to lose a game while you're best reliever/player sits on the bench waiting for an opportunity that never comes.

 

Ok. You and I are convinced. Now let's talk to John.

[a700hitter]

I am not sure what Farrell's philosophy is on using his closer, but he used kimbrel the right way on Sunday. I thought that he waited one batter too long to go to him. This was one of those games that needed saving in the 8th inning as the game was starting to slip away. Kimbrel has been lights out and got the key punch out with 1 out. We piled on an avalanche of runs in the 9th to put the game out of reach and kimbrel was not needed for the 9th inning so he did not get credited with the save. This just highlights the stupidity of the Save stat, because Kimbrel did save the game when it needed saving. Had the lead slipped away, the Twins would have used its pen differently in the 9th inning and maybe we don't score at all and lose the game. Will Farrell use Kimbrel like this in the future? I have no idea whether he will be consistent with this approach.

[S5Dewey]

I am not sure what Farrell's philosophy is on using his closer, but he used kimbrel the right way on Sunday. I thought that he waited one batter too long to go to him. This was one of those games that needed saving in the 8th inning as the game was starting to slip away. Kimbrel has been lights out and got the key punch out with 1 out. We piled on an avalanche of runs in the 9th to put the game out of reach and kimbrel was not needed for the 9th inning so he did not get credited with the save. This just highlights the stupidity of the Save stat, because Kimbrel did save the game when it needed saving. Had the lead slipped away, the Twins would have used its pen differently in the 9th inning and maybe we don't score at all and lose the game. Will Farrell use Kimbrel like this in the future? I have no idea whether he will be consistent with this approach.

 

My guess is that Farrell will go back to business as usual. It was a very easy decision to pull Kimbrel after the Sox accumulated that 11 run lead but it would take some real courage to have Kelly pitch the 9th with a one run lead.

[SoxHop]

Even at the MLB level when a guy gets on first base, the coach tells him how many out there are, reminds him to let the liner go through before running if there are less than 2 outs, tells him to run on contact if there are 2 outs etc. if the guy is a base stealer, he will be told the pitcher's time to the plate. They say these things for a reason. If this information isn't continuously provided, they will forget how many out there are etc. There is a reason why the pitcher and his middle infielders decide who is going to take the throw at second base when a runner gets on first with less than two outs. It isn't a big mystery which guy will take the throw, but they need the reminder. I saw a pitcher the other day, lead the second baseman for that throw, but the SS was covering and a DP ball was botched. Good coaching would also have instilled in the pitcher that if he is unsure who will be covering second base that he should throw the ball directly over second base and one of the fielders will get there. The pitcher in question didn't get the memo and threw the ball to the second baseman near his position and not over the base. Major leaguers need to get reminded of these things constantly.

 

Major league coaches and managers are supposed to go over game situations and ask players what they are supposed to do in those situations. I remember a story about Tommy Lasorda having one of those sessions with his team. He set up a scenario with the game on the line, runners on the bases and less than 2 out. He looked at Pedro Guerrero a notoriously bad fielding 3B and asked him what he is thinking in that situation. Guerrero answered that he is hoping that the ball is not hit to him. Lasorda pressed the matter asking him what else is he thinking. Pedro answered that he was hoping that the ball isn't hit to Saxy (i.e. Steve Sax) either. Lots of laughs, yes, but these sessions are supposed to occur at the MLB level.

 

CP, I think you agree with me that repetitive bone head plays in the field and on the bases falls on the coaching staff. That stuff just can't be happening on a regular basis at the MLB level.

 

Convincing post A700. I just don't think what ever the staff is doing could make it this bad. My guess is that it will level out the rest of the year.

[cp176]

How does a coach make that happen? Or what kind of coaching flaw makes that happen, especially at the degree we have been seeing?

 

I really think SoxHop that it is very much about repetition of things, the little things, that lead to the big things. All players at all levels want to be coached. What you emphasize and talk about in practice and if you have high expectations then if the talent is there stuff gets done. All good coaches have ways of getting the most out of the players they work with. I'm not sure that there is any one best way. You find something that works and you stick with it but more often than not it comes right down to doing correctly what you work on the most. If situational baseball is what you have been working on and things still continue to look bad, then maybe you are not demanding enough or your players just can't do what you expect of them. i have no idea what jF works on or how he goes about his business. I think that we assume that since they operate at the highest level then they must work on every component that has to be worked on. If that is the case, then maybe we overrate our guys.

On the other hand, if they don't work on all of the little things that need to be worked on because they assume that because someone else must have taught them what they need to do already, they just aren't a very good staff. i tend to think that jF could be a little more demanding but I would bet that they work on everything that needs working on and that we (me) might overrate the overall ability of our guys just a bit.

[S5Dewey]

I really think SoxHop that it is very much about repetition of things, the little things, that lead to the big things. All players at all levels want to be coached. What you emphasize and talk about in practice and if you have high expectations then if the talent is there stuff gets done. All good coaches have ways of getting the most out of the players they work with. I'm not sure that there is any one best way. You find something that works and you stick with it but more often than not it comes right down to doing correctly what you work on the most. If situational baseball is what you have been working on and things still continue to look bad, then maybe you are not demanding enough or your players just can't do what you expect of them. i have no idea what jF works on or how he goes about his business. I think that we assume that since they operate at the highest level then they must work on every component that has to be worked on. If that is the case, then maybe we overrate our guys.

On the other hand, if they don't work on all of the little things that need to be worked on because they assume that because someone else must have taught them what they need to do already, they just aren't a very good staff. i tend to think that jF could be a little more demanding but I would bet that they work on everything that needs working on and that we (me) might overrate the overall ability of our guys just a bit.

 

I've often wondered how much time they spend "working on things" once the season starts. Look, I'm not suggesting that we shed any tears for MLB players but at the same time their "job" is demanding both physically and time-wise. They're expected to show up at the field 4 hours before game time and don't leave until an hour after the game is over. During that time they have to get dressed (leisurely, I'm sure!) have their BP, share the field with the visiting team, and have the field vacated in time for the grounds crew to get the field ready for play.

 

These guys are professionals and they've played hundreds of games and spent thousands of hours practicing by the time they get to this level. IMO they know what to do in just about any situation. It's the function of the coaches to remind them of those things.

 

IMO the Field Manager's primary purpose isn't to handle in-game situations as much as it is to run the clubhouse. He has 25 players with 25 egos in the clubhouse at any given time, and s*** happens. Being field manager is secondary to trying to the clubhouse issues. I agree completely with cp in that for the Field Manager it's all about establishing expectations, demanding those expectations be met, and motivating. Tito was an excellent on-field manager and handled the bullpen well, but it was losing the clubhouse that led to his departure.

[Bellhorn04]

His hitting compared to Marreros is quite the difference. When you can't hit above 200 in Pawtucket you should not get that at bat. Plus they also had D'arnaud on the bench who could have played third.

 

OK well, obviously we're just going to disagree on this. The score at the time was 7-4 for us. My general attitude is that when you have a lead in the late innings your priority becomes preventing runs. So you keep the better defender in the game. That's all. Farrell can be questioned for the decision, but he did have reasons for it.

[Fisk]

OK well, obviously we're just going to disagree on this. The score at the time was 7-4 for us. My general attitude is that when you have a lead in the late innings your priority becomes preventing runs. So you keep the better defender in the game. That's all. Farrell can be questioned for the decision, but he did have reasons for it.

 

That's what I'm doing is questioning.

[Bellhorn04]

My guess is that Farrell will go back to business as usual. It was a very easy decision to pull Kimbrel after the Sox accumulated that 11 run lead but it would take some real courage to have Kelly pitch the 9th with a one run lead.

 

In this case I doubt he had any intention of having Kelly pitch the 9th until the lead was 6 runs or more. I think the original plan was for Kimbrel to get the last 5 outs.

[Bellhorn04]

That's what I'm doing is questioning.

 

You said it was a big mistake and it made no sense. That's a little beyond questioning.

[Fisk]

You said it was a big mistake and it made no sense. That's a little beyond questioning.

 

To me it was a mistake and I'm a Farrell defender. To me it was more important to add on then a 2-3% chance our third basemen would make an error.

[Bellhorn04]

To me it was a mistake and I'm a Farrell defender. To me it was more important to add on then a 2-3% chance our third basemen would make an error.

 

Well, you can't blame Farrell for being a little paranoid considering the butchery he has seen at third base this year.

[Fisk]

Well, you can't blame Farrell for being a little paranoid considering the butchery he has seen at third base this year.

 

But I already blamed him.

[Bellhorn04]

To me it was a mistake and I'm a Farrell defender. To me it was more important to add on then a 2-3% chance our third basemen would make an error.

 

Rutledge has made 2 errors in 41 innings. So the chances of him making an error in a 2 inning stretch are actually more like 10%. And that's just errors, it doesn't take into account his lack of range.

[Maxbialystock]

Last night I watched part of the 9th inning of the Nationals at Orioles game when Washington had a nice rally going. They had cut the margin to 6-4 with just 1 man out and runners on 2d and 3d, so a single can tie the game.

 

Instead, it was hard hit grounder to the firstbaseman Davis who grabbed, sprinted to 1B to get the runner out, and headed toward home thinking there would be a play. There wasn't. The guy on 3B changed his mind. The guy on 2d, a pinch runner in for the guy who just hit a double for the Nationals, however, was headed toward 3d and got caught in a run down, so finally the guy on 3B heads for home and then just stands there so someone could please tag him out. End of game.

[a700hitter]

Last night I watched part of the 9th inning of the Nationals at Orioles game when Washington had a nice rally going. They had cut the margin to 6-4 with just 1 man out and runners on 2d and 3d, so a single can tie the game.

 

Instead, it was hard hit grounder to the firstbaseman Davis who grabbed, sprinted to 1B to get the runner out, and headed toward home thinking there would be a play. There wasn't. The guy on 3B changed his mind. The guy on 2d, a pinch runner in for the guy who just hit a double for the Nationals, however, was headed toward 3d and got caught in a run down, so finally the guy on 3B heads for home and then just stands there so someone could please tag him out. End of game.

The Nats are managed by one of the alltime great managers.

[Slasher9]

perhaps John Henry should splurge and buy a couple dozen copies of this to share with the players and coaches:

http://www.wherestheplay.com/

[Maxbialystock]

The Nats are managed by one of the alltime great managers.

 

Possibly. My point is that sometimes bad base running occurs because some players just don't have a good feel for timing things on the basepaths. Sometimes--like that triple play on what seemed at first to be an infield fly rule--it's just a bad situation for the baserunner (s).

 

My all time favorite gaffe occurred with Nava on 2B when a Sox player hit a ball deep to RF. Nava couldn't decide what to do, but finally decided it was going to be caught so he actually slid back into 2B just to be absolutely sure he would be safe. The ball went all the way to the wall and should have been at least a double with Nava scoring, but it turned into a single with the hitter wisely spotting Nava's indecision at 2B and holding up at 1B. Some players simply can't run the bases.

[Emp9]

perhaps John Henry should splurge and buy a couple dozen copies of this to share with the players and coaches:

http://www.wherestheplay.com/

 

If it were up to DD, he'd get one copy and nothing more.

[a700hitter]

Possibly. My point is that sometimes bad base running occurs because some players just don't have a good feel for timing things on the basepaths. Sometimes--like that triple play on what seemed at first to be an infield fly rule--it's just a bad situation for the baserunner (s).

 

My all time favorite gaffe occurred with Nava on 2B when a Sox player hit a ball deep to RF. Nava couldn't decide what to do, but finally decided it was going to be caught so he actually slid back into 2B just to be absolutely sure he would be safe. The ball went all the way to the wall and should have been at least a double with Nava scoring, but it turned into a single with the hitter wisely spotting Nava's indecision at 2B and holding up at 1B. Some players simply can't run the bases.

Nava was clueless on the bases. I remember a Yankee game where he pulled a couple of rocks on the bases. I think he tagged up and tried to advance on a foul pop to the catcher behind home plate. You would just shake your head.

[Spudboy]

The Nats are managed by one of the alltime great managers.

 

lol

[Fisk]

Rutledge has made 2 errors in 41 innings. So the chances of him making an error in a 2 inning stretch are actually more like 10%. And that's just errors, it doesn't take into account his lack of range.

 

That is not his career rate. Way to small of a sample size.

[Bellhorn04]

That is not his career rate. Way to small of a sample size.

 

Rutledge has only started 20 games at third base in his entire MLB career, and he has 7 errors, a fielding % of .868. He doesn't play much there, and when he does he's really bad.