Farrell

[Bellhorn04]

There is no evidence of any manager being able to repeat that skill.

 

So Francona and Miller and the 'relief ace' thing is just bunk?

[Bellhorn04]

Also, isn't there some sort of grading system for managers now?

[a700hitter]

Well even if there is nothing important about the job, and that is not at all what I'm saying, somebody has to do it. Somebody has to run the ship.

 

Managers have to deal with the media without creating a media circus at every turn (see Bobby valentine). A good manager will know how to get the best out of his players by the atmosphere that he creates in the clubhouse.

 

And no, I have not given them a pass on teaching smart baserunning and fielding. I just said that those fundamentals should already be well established by the time a player reaches the major leagues.

The responsibilities for Clubhouse management and the Press could be easily handled by others in the organization. You do give them a pass for poor base running a stupid fielding, because you are assuming that they were not taught the right way at the lower levels. It probably was taught, but it needs to be constantly reinforced even at the MLB level. Edited May 30, 2017 by a700hitter

[a700hitter]

There is no evidence of any manager being able to repeat that skill.

But every team needs a manager to keep the clubhouse entertained and answer questions by the press?

[Kimmi]

So Francona and Miller and the 'relief ace' thing is just bunk?

 

No, it's not just bunk.

 

But Francona could try the same types of moves every postseason for the next 10 postseasons, and the results are likely to be mixed.

 

Perhaps it's not so much that Francona is a managerial genius as it is that Miller is an awesome reliever?

[Bellhorn04]

Looks like the dugout incident with Farrell didn't do any harm to Pomeranz.

[devildavid]

The responsibilities for Clubhouse management and the Press could be easily handled by others in the organization. You do give them a pass for poor base running a stupid fielding, because you are assuming that they were not taught the right way at the lower levels. It probably was taught, but it needs to be constantly reinforced even at the MLB level.

 

The manager manages the coaching staff who are supposed to drill the players in fundamental baseball skills. If the manager picks good coaches and communicates well with them, the fundamentals will be instilled. Managers are not simply there to speak to the press and create "clubhouse atmosphere." They are there to run the coaching staff and communicate what is important for each player to work on in general and specific terms. They are expected to understand the talents players have and how to get the best out of that talent to best serve the team. A lot of this is done in preparation time outside of actual game activity.

[oldtimer]

The manager manages the coaching staff who are supposed to drill the players in fundamental baseball skills. If the manager picks good coaches and communicates well with them, the fundamentals will be instilled. Managers are not simply there to speak to the press and create "clubhouse atmosphere." They are there to run the coaching staff and communicate what is important for each player to work on in general and specific terms. They are expected to understand the talents players have and how to get the best out of that talent to best serve the team. A lot of this is done in preparation time outside of actual game activity.

 

Well said. The manager should also impart a positive attitude instead of just being impassive in the dugout.

[a700hitter]

The manager manages the coaching staff who are supposed to drill the players in fundamental baseball skills. If the manager picks good coaches and communicates well with them, the fundamentals will be instilled. Managers are not simply there to speak to the press and create "clubhouse atmosphere." They are there to run the coaching staff and communicate what is important for each player to work on in general and specific terms. They are expected to understand the talents players have and how to get the best out of that talent to best serve the team. A lot of this is done in preparation time outside of actual game activity.

I have just been playing devil's advocate. The same people who want to deem in game managing as insignificant are really struggling to make a case to keep field managers. I would like to point out that instilling and reinforcing fundamentals is an on-field in-game function. Anyone who has coached at any level knows that. It is a part and parcel of in-game management.

[devildavid]

I have just been playing devil's advocate. The same people who want to deem in game managing as insignificant are really struggling to make a case to keep field managers. I would like to point out that instilling and reinforcing fundamentals is an on-field in-game function. Anyone who has coached at any level knows that. It is a part and parcel of in-game management.

 

No one is saying these things can't happen during a game. They are just saying that the most important part takes place when preparing the team to play. If you don't drill fundamentals outside of game experience you can't expect to effectively do it during game experience. Games are played to win or lose, not for training. If the manager doesn't prepare the players to succeed, they are not doing their job properly. And preparation is the most critical part of the manager's job.

[devildavid]

Well said. The manager should also impart a positive attitude instead of just being impassive in the dugout.

 

I don't think the manager's demeanor in the dugout is all that critical. Both calm and fiery managers can succeed and all other types in between.

[devildavid]

Looks like the dugout incident with Farrell didn't do any harm to Pomeranz.

 

It is impossible to read into these incidents. They flare up now and then and they all have different consequences.

[devildavid]

No, but the manager can pretty much kick back and just "sit and spit". LOL

 

Joking, of course.

 

Managers do have to make in game decisions. But often times, just letting the players do their thing is the best way to manage the game.

 

That is the genius of Terry Francona.

[sk7326]

Who does a field manager have to coordinate with and what obstacles can he remove for a player that are not in the purview of someone else in the organization with well defined responsibilities. It is not like the players are being assigned projects where they need to interface with people in a massive organization or need to deal with budgetary requests. I don't see the parallels to a boss. I think it is a poor analogy.

 

There has been a lot written since this - so I am going to try to address more than just the quoted point ...

 

1. The manager is the press guy. That takes up a decent chunk of time - and in Boston more than that. Would it be better to have a trained press guy doing the day to day - possibly in isolation, but it clearly would be poor for the customer relationship. Fans want that connection to the club every day, and so someone who is in the dugout is best served to do it.

 

2. There are a non-baseball demands which have to be worked. Community relations, marketing, the people who get photos onto things, NESN spots. There are more stakeholders who want a piece of the players - and the players still have their actual work to do. So the manager has to help facilitate that stuff.

 

3. How do you optimize performance? Now, there is a ton of publicly available information (obviously) about stuff players do - and heartfelt attempts to measure them. The org probably has proprietary versions of all of these - and do things with Pitch F/X data which we'll never know. There are also the advance scouts who are sending intel back on tonight's opponent. All of these functions are theoretical inputs into performance. I mean, knowing all this stuff helps - but how does that get translated into stuff that the player and manager can use. That is a big piece - processing lots of data (or more accurately, somebody else's analyses) - into actionable stuff.

 

4. What is the goal of the organization? Now, who doesn't want to go 162-0? But there are 83 win seasons which don't move the org forward, and there was 65 win seasons that do. That's the managers job too, no? Putting the management's plan and goals (hopefully the manager has some input here) into action. The best example is seeing how hopeless Pedroia looked in a 2006 callup - and then having management decide "he's gonna do this" and Francona not pulling the Alex Cora lever hyperactively. (of course Pedroia had to have rewarded that)

 

5. The in-game decisions are significant obviously - but I reckon you're basically looking at a decision tree which has been plotted out fairly comprehensively beforehand. If some situation occurs at some point in the game, we'll do this. The manager is not executing this robotically - but yeah, most of the decisions made in a game are not interesting, and fairly obvious. Managing a pitching staff (especially during the season) is probably the most obvious tactical thing a manager does - especially balancing the goal of tonight (Win) vs the longer term (say, why don't we pitch Sale on 2 days rest??).

[sk7326]

That is the genius of Terry Francona.

 

He is terrific. This is stuff Bobby Cox and Earl Weaver also had down too.

[Bellhorn04]

5. The in-game decisions are significant obviously - but I reckon you're basically looking at a decision tree which has been plotted out fairly comprehensively beforehand. If some situation occurs at some point in the game, we'll do this. The manager is not executing this robotically - but yeah, most of the decisions made in a game are not interesting, and fairly obvious. Managing a pitching staff (especially during the season) is probably the most obvious tactical thing a manager does - especially balancing the goal of tonight (Win) vs the longer term (say, why don't we pitch Sale on 2 days rest??).

 

We've heard SO much about the 'relief ace' deployment thing and the way Francona used Miller...is this something that could make a significant difference or not?

[sk7326]

We've heard SO much about the 'relief ace' deployment thing and the way Francona used Miller...is this something that could make a significant difference or not?

 

In the playoffs - absolutely.

 

And remember, Francona nodded that way anyway. He was liberal in his use of Foulke and Papelbon in their title chases. I am not sure if it is necessarily sustainable over a regular season. I mean, could you have a pitcher who goes 100 innings over 45-50 appearances? Sure. But the way pens are used these days - I am not sure a manager wants to not be able to go to Miller on back to back days for instance.

 

The relief ace thing is about matching your best reliever to the situation where it will help the team most - and often that is not the 9th. Hell, Farrell has been significantly more liberal with Kimbrel's usage - so I do think the idea is taking hold, but stuff moves slowly.

[oldtimer]

Just watched the Yankees pound the Blue Jays 7 to 0. They hit 4 home runs in one inning off of Grilli. Lots of action in their dugout. These guys are having fun and have a lot of guys who can hit with power. The alternative is our guys who seem to get up, make a quiet out and go back to the dugout with their tails between their legs. Farrell seems to lack emotion as well. Comeon guys, play with some fire and spirit.

[Yaz Fan Since 67]

I was disappointed Farrell pulled Kelly after giving up a hit on a 102 MPH fastball (what an at bat) and a little dribbler. He had no way to know that Kimbrell would struggle and need so many pitches, and he should have gone to him in the 9th, but now he is spent for today's game.

[Kimmi]

I was disappointed Farrell pulled Kelly after giving up a hit on a 102 MPH fastball (what an at bat) and a little dribbler. He had no way to know that Kimbrell would struggle and need so many pitches' date=' and he should have gone to him in the 9th, but now he is spent for today's game.[/quote']

 

I have no problem with Farrell using Kimbrel in that situation. Kimbrel had been untouchable until last night's game. It's a shame that he ended up throwing so many pitches, but at least we won the game. If Kelly would have stayed in and failed to hold the game, Farrell would be criticized for not bringing Kimbrel in.

 

The FOX announcers brought up a good point about Kimbrel 'saving' the game in the 8th inning, then possibly having a bit of an adrenaline let down going back out for the 9th with the team up by 4. I don't know if that affected Kimbrel or not, but it makes sense.

[a700hitter]

I have no problem with Farrell using Kimbrel in that situation. Kimbrel had been untouchable until last night's game. It's a shame that he ended up throwing so many pitches, but at least we won the game. If Kelly would have stayed in and failed to hold the game, Farrell would be criticized for not bringing Kimbrel in.

 

The FOX announcers brought up a good point about Kimbrel 'saving' the game in the 8th inning, then possibly having a bit of an adrenaline let down going back out for the 9th with the team up by 4. I don't know if that affected Kimbrel or not, but it makes sense.

With the tying run at the plate in the 8th inning, it was the highest percentage move to bring in the hammer. Kelly is much more prone to give up a home run ball.

[moonslav59]

With the tying run at the plate in the 8th inning, it was the highest percentage move to bring in the hammer. Kelly is much more prone to give up a home run ball.

 

Agreed, although Kelly has yet to let up an HR (24.1 IP this year).

[S5Dewey]

Agreed, although Kelly has yet to let up an HR (24.1 IP this year).

 

Agreed, and it's easy to second guess the manager. But ^^ isn't much consolation when Kelly gives up a HR with Kimbrel on the bench. I like bringing in the 'closer' in the situation where he may be able to save the game, regardless of the inning.

[Emp9]

Kelly didn't pitch bad, he just ran into a lot of bad luck bs after the 2nd out. It happens, and I'm glad Farrell went with Kimbrel to stop the bleeding. Any manager would've done the same.

[SCM33]

Some of the best managers were despised by their players.

 

Yeah, while those players may have despised their manager, they probably respected him.

 

The difference is nobody respects Farrell. He thinks hes intelligent when he says things like "impacted the ball". John, you sound like an idiot, just say "he hit the ball". The guy is a clown and the players know it.

Edited June 4, 2017 by SCM33

[a700hitter]

Yeah, while those players may have despised their manager, they probably respected him.

 

The difference is nobody respects Farrell. He thinks hes intelligent when he says things like "impacted the ball". John, you sound like an idiot, just say "he hit the ball". The guy is a clown and the players know it.

Impacted the ball. LOL!! That does sound pretty douchey. Impacted is for wisdom teeth, Farrell, and you have no wisdom.

[sk7326]

Yeah, while those players may have despised their manager, they probably respected him.

 

The difference is nobody respects Farrell. He thinks hes intelligent when he says things like "impacted the ball". John, you sound like an idiot, just say "he hit the ball". The guy is a clown and the players know it.

 

Do they not? It seems like the effort level has been fine - they have scrapped through stuff.

[cp176]

Yeah, while those players may have despised their manager, they probably respected him.

 

The difference is nobody respects Farrell. He thinks hes intelligent when he says things like "impacted the ball". John, you sound like an idiot, just say "he hit the ball". The guy is a clown and the players know it.

 

This is your opinion. Whether or not he is a good manager, we probably all have our concerns but i haven't seen anything from any player that tells me that they don't respect and like their manager. What Pedroia did is on Pedroia. As for Pomeranz little fit in the dugout, it looked to me as though he was lucky that JF didn't kick his ass. The result looks like Pomeranz started to grow a pair in his next outing. i'm not a huge Farrell fan but it looks to me as though his payers still support him.

[devildavid]

Yeah, while those players may have despised their manager, they probably respected him.

 

The difference is nobody respects Farrell. He thinks hes intelligent when he says things like "impacted the ball". John, you sound like an idiot, just say "he hit the ball". The guy is a clown and the players know it.

 

You are projecting your feelings toward Farrell on the players. You really have no idea what they think of him. Who cares what words he chooses? Criticizing Farrell based on his style doesn't mean much.

[mvp 78]

You can criticize Farrell for W/L. Everything else is just hearsay.