Farrell

[devildavid]

Hers is an example of an in game decision I am critical of Farrell, if he made the call. June 2nd game against the Orioles, top of the seventh, Sox down 3-1. With two outs JBJ singles home Bogaerts who had doubled to lead off the inning. With Rutledge up to bat, JBJ attempts a steal and is thrown out. The tying run is on base and you give it away trying to "make something happen" and instead you end the inning. Bad move IMO.

[Bellhorn04]

Hers is an example of an in game decision I am critical of Farrell, if he made the call. June 2nd game against the Orioles, top of the seventh, Sox down 3-1. With two outs JBJ singles home Bogaerts who had doubled to lead off the inning. With Rutledge up to bat, JBJ attempts a steal and is thrown out. The tying run is on base and you give it away trying to "make something happen" and instead you end the inning. Bad move IMO.

 

The counterpoint is that JBJ has had a very high % of success on his steal attempts. He was 24/26 before that attempt, now 24/27.

[Maxbialystock]

Hers is an example of an in game decision I am critical of Farrell, if he made the call. June 2nd game against the Orioles, top of the seventh, Sox down 3-1. With two outs JBJ singles home Bogaerts who had doubled to lead off the inning. With Rutledge up to bat, JBJ attempts a steal and is thrown out. The tying run is on base and you give it away trying to "make something happen" and instead you end the inning. Bad move IMO.

 

The tying run is on 1b with the bottom of the batting order coming up. Because Rutledge didn't swing at that pitch, my guess is that JBJ took off on his own. As Bellhorn says, he doesn't steal very often, but is usually successful when he does.

 

Not a very convincing example of Farrell's presumed ineptitude. You and most managerial critics--because they are almost all criticized by fans after a losing game--seem to forget that, regardless of what the manager does, the results depend on what the players do.

[Slasher9]

steals, bunts, manager decisions, sac flies, momentum, strikeouts, double plays, focus, HR's, errors have zero impact on games.

the outcome of the game of baseball is entirely random.

[mvp 78]

steals, bunts, manager decisions, sac flies, momentum, strikeouts, double plays, focus, HR's, errors have zero impact on games.

the outcome of the game of baseball is entirely random.

 

I agree completely. 2013 was a random, fluky season. I don't celebrate that season at all. The whole time the team was playing in the WS I was just like "LOL this is so random so who cares."

 

The only thing that wasn't random was all the smoke that was enveloping our evil ownership group during the on field celebration. The smell of sulfur is thick in the air whenever Vlad Dracul (JH) leaves his coffin.

[Maxbialystock]

steals, bunts, manager decisions, sac flies, momentum, strikeouts, double plays, focus, HR's, errors have zero impact on games.

the outcome of the game of baseball is entirely random.

 

Nice try. Of course the manager counts because he has the final say on how to use the bullpen, who starts, the lineup, who pinch hits etc.

 

I have said repeatedly that the manager is answerable for the won-lost record, especially if it is better or worse than the FO's assessment of team potential.

 

With regard to that, right now the Yankees are in first place in the AL East and one might opine that is because they are ranked 2d in the AL in runs scored, just 18 runs, but also 3 fewer games, fewer than the Astros. And they are ranked 3d in the AL in ERA.

 

The Sox, meanwhile, are ranked 5th in runs scored and 4th in ERA. Oh, and they are 2 games behind the Yankees at the end of the first 1/3 of the season.

 

So, me, I think Farrell right now is holding his own even though I have complained about him now and then during the season.

[Slasher9]

Hey Max. even thought it was posted right after your post...that wasn't really towards you. it was just an observation of observations from observations.

[cp176]

steals, bunts, manager decisions, sac flies, momentum, strikeouts, double plays, focus, HR's, errors have zero impact on games.

the outcome of the game of baseball is entirely random.

 

It has been proven statistically and emphasized many times that you are without a doubt correct. It is all about talent and a random roll of the dice. The rest of those things are just a bunch of horse s***. lol - i'm finally coming around.

[illinoisredsox]

Hers is an example of an in game decision I am critical of Farrell, if he made the call. June 2nd game against the Orioles, top of the seventh, Sox down 3-1. With two outs JBJ singles home Bogaerts who had doubled to lead off the inning. With Rutledge up to bat, JBJ attempts a steal and is thrown out. The tying run is on base and you give it away trying to "make something happen" and instead you end the inning. Bad move IMO.

 

Rutledge was not likely to drive him home from first (he's had 1 extra base hit all year) whereas you at least have a shot from second. Also, I think they said JBJ was something like 24 for 26 in steal attempts career wise (now 24-27); I have no issue with the attempt. Personally, I don't think JBJ runs enough.

 

Since he was thrown out by 10 feet, I don't think JBJ got all that good a jump off a guy who seemed pretty slow to the plate. However, Joseph's throw was perfect, so I doubt he would have been safe anyway. Sometimes the other team makes plays.

[Kimmi]

steals, bunts, manager decisions, sac flies, momentum, strikeouts, double plays, focus, HR's, errors have zero impact on games.

the outcome of the game of baseball is entirely random.

 

Sigh.....

[SCM33]

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

Oh yeah, Pedroia definitely respects him. Multiple times this season alone he has thrown him under the bus. Being the longest tenured player on the team, and certainly the most quotable, makes you question their respect for him. Effort level has nothing to do with the manager. "Scrapping through stuff" has nothing to do with the manager. The team has too much talent not to.

 

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.

I didnt say anything about whether or not hes a good manager (hes not). What Pedroia did is on Pedroia? WTF does that mean? Hes the longest tenured player on the team. You are going to dismiss what hes done/said on multiple occasions to fit your argument? Talk about cop out.

 

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.

No, I really dont care either way. With the Sox FO and the way they have run things, Farrell has little say in the things that actually matter anyway. Hes just a puppet. The players know it and he sounds like an idiot every time he opens his mouth.

 

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

Fair enough. But the fact that they have finished in first place twice, and last place twice......I think shows that he has nothing to do with the outcome. If he has a good team, they win. When he doesnt, they lose.

 

steals, bunts, manager decisions, sac flies, momentum, strikeouts, double plays, focus, HR's, errors have zero impact on games.

the outcome of the game of baseball is entirely random.

What? So none of those individual plays matter during the game? Why even play then.....just flip a coin!

[sk7326]

steals, bunts, manager decisions, sac flies, momentum, strikeouts, double plays, focus, HR's, errors have zero impact on games.

the outcome of the game of baseball is entirely random.

 

There are few things a manager can do that transcend having their players play better - and that usually comes with having better players.

 

Most of the overt in-game "managing" things (aside from substitutions) don't shift the needle all that much.

 

Winning never stops being awesome. Now, the best team won't (often) win the title because baseball is funny. Those are two separate deals.

[sk7326]

Oh yeah, Pedroia definitely respects him. Multiple times this season alone he has thrown him under the bus. Being the longest tenured player on the team, and certainly the most quotable, makes you question their respect for him. Effort level has nothing to do with the manager. "Scrapping through stuff" has nothing to do with the manager. The team has too much talent not to.

 

 

I didnt say anything about whether or not hes a good manager (hes not). What Pedroia did is on Pedroia? WTF does that mean? Hes the longest tenured player on the team. You are going to dismiss what hes done/said on multiple occasions to fit your argument? Talk about cop out.

 

 

No, I really dont care either way. With the Sox FO and the way they have run things, Farrell has little say in the things that actually matter anyway. Hes just a puppet. The players know it and he sounds like an idiot every time he opens his mouth.

 

 

Fair enough. But the fact that they have finished in first place twice, and last place twice......I think shows that he has nothing to do with the outcome. If he has a good team, they win. When he doesnt, they lose.

 

 

What? So none of those individual plays matter during the game? Why even play then.....just flip a coin!

 

They are well prepared and play hard for him - they have the 3rd best record in AL now ... i am not a huge Farrell fan, but he has been fine

[Dojji]

And once again, the problem really comes down to the difference between fans who think managers make a difference in games and the fans who know they really don't.

 

Manager is a hat with a person under it. The person isn't even as important as the hat and the hat isn't very important. Unless you've got a great guy to fill that post such as Tito or Torre you might as well have just about anyone.

 

Farrell is a nonproblem as a manager. He's an average manager, neither inspiring greatness in his players nor getting in the way of victory. That's fine for the people who all they want is a guy to stand under the hat. IF you're looking for excellence in a manager you're well advised to look elsewhere.

[mvp 78]

Managers don't matter unless they are really good or bad?

 

So managers matter then?

[Bellhorn04]

I could be wrong but I think Farrell may be improving as a manager. (Now he'll probably do something idiotic to make me regret saying that.)

[mvp 78]

I could be wrong but I think Farrell may be improving as a manager. (Now he'll probably do something idiotic to make me regret saying that.)

 

Maybe. The best way for a manager to develop is for them to go to a new team (Francona, Torre, Showalter, etc.). It's the same advice I give a lot of accountants. The way to grow is to keep moving and keep learning. If you stick around where you are comfortable, you're more likely to just be comfortable in your bubble. Moving on and getting new experiences is a great way to gain experience.

[mvp 78]

Fair enough. But the fact that they have finished in first place twice, and last place twice......I think shows that he has nothing to do with the outcome. If he has a good team, they win. When he doesnt, they lose.

 

2013 was just a fluky random occurrence! It had nothing to do with Napoli playing out of his mind in April while Ortiz was injured. It had nothing to do with Buchholz pitching unbelievably for half a season. It had nothing to do with Koji being absolutely dominant for the whole season. It had nothing to do with Victorino playing the best RF since Dewey. It had nothing to do with a resurgent season from Lackey. It had nothing to do with Lester being the ace of the staff.

 

The first few games of the WS seemed to expose Farrell as being slow to react. A few of the games really got away from him. At the end of the day though, they won and he earned all the accolades deserving of it.

 

It was an older team that was unsustainable in the long run. They dumped Lester and Lackey in 2014 and I can't blame Farrell for that year. 2015 was a really young team with no staff ace. I'm not sure I can entirely blame Farrell for that either. To me, 2016 is a bigger indication of how good of a manager Farrell is. If they miss the postseason this year, he should be fired.

[devildavid]

The tying run is on 1b with the bottom of the batting order coming up. Because Rutledge didn't swing at that pitch, my guess is that JBJ took off on his own. As Bellhorn says, he doesn't steal very often, but is usually successful when he does.

 

Not a very convincing example of Farrell's presumed ineptitude. You and most managerial critics--because they are almost all criticized by fans after a losing game--seem to forget that, regardless of what the manager does, the results depend on what the players do.

 

I'm just saying I didn't like the move and I don't know if Farrell made the call. Whether or not JBJ stole the base a hitter after him would still have to get on base safely for the Sox to have a chance to score. JBJ is not going to steal his way home. With two outs, the best way to get him home is for following batters to reach base safely. (Yes, there are other scenarios involving wild pitches and passed balls, but these seem like a greater long shot.)

 

Bottom line, if JBJ stays put on first the tying run remains on base until the last out is made. Stealing is always a risk and a worse risk with two outs.

[S5Dewey]

I'm just saying I didn't like the move and I don't know if Farrell made the call. Whether or not JBJ stole the base a hitter after him would still have to get on base safely for the Sox to have a chance to score. JBJ is not going to steal his way home. With two outs, the best way to get him home is for following batters to reach base safely. (Yes, there are other scenarios involving wild pitches and passed balls, but these seem like a greater long shot.)

 

Bottom line, if JBJ stays put on first the tying run remains on base until the last out is made. Stealing is always a risk and a worse risk with two outs.

 

Ya know.. I ran into a very similar situation just recently at a game I was at and one of the guys I was with started criticizing the coach for having a player running at a certain time. My response to him was that 'we love it... when it works'.

 

And that's the way it is. We love it when a manager has a player steal successfully, especially if that runner later scores on a single. But when the runner gets thrown out it was a stupid move. It's that way with any gamble. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. All things considered I have no problem with JBJ trying to steal in that situation. I just wish it had worked out better.

[devildavid]

Rutledge was not likely to drive him home from first (he's had 1 extra base hit all year) whereas you at least have a shot from second. Also, I think they said JBJ was something like 24 for 26 in steal attempts career wise (now 24-27); I have no issue with the attempt. Personally, I don't think JBJ runs enough.

 

Since he was thrown out by 10 feet, I don't think JBJ got all that good a jump off a guy who seemed pretty slow to the plate. However, Joseph's throw was perfect, so I doubt he would have been safe anyway. Sometimes the other team makes plays.

 

It's not the steal attempt but the game situation it happened in. The Sox had just scored to come within one run. They had a base runner on. The best way to get him home is for the batter(s) behind him to get on base safely. So if Rutledge gets on base it is up to the next batter. As long as you don't make the last out, you have a chance to score the tying run.

[a700hitter]

2013 was just a fluky random occurrence! It had nothing to do with Napoli playing out of his mind in April while Ortiz was injured. It had nothing to do with Buchholz pitching unbelievably for half a season. It had nothing to do with Koji being absolutely dominant for the whole season. It had nothing to do with Victorino playing the best RF since Dewey. It had nothing to do with a resurgent season from Lackey. It had nothing to do with Lester being the ace of the staff.

 

The first few games of the WS seemed to expose Farrell as being slow to react. A few of the games really got away from him. At the end of the day though, they won and he earned all the accolades deserving of it.

 

It was an older team that was unsustainable in the long run. They dumped Lester and Lackey in 2014 and I can't blame Farrell for that year. 2015 was a really young team with no staff ace. I'm not sure I can entirely blame Farrell for that either. To me, 2016 is a bigger indication of how good of a manager Farrell is. If they miss the postseason this year, he should be fired.

Farrell who out-managed Matheny, who stubbornly kept pitching to Ortiz. In his book, Ortiz explains that as a former catcher, Matheny thought he could figure out how to get out any MFer, but he didn't understand that when an MFer gets that hot, there is nothing you can do with him. By the time Matheny realized that he had made a mistake, it was game 6 and the other guys started hitting.

[Bellhorn04]

Maybe. The best way for a manager to develop is for them to go to a new team (Francona, Torre, Showalter, etc.). It's the same advice I give a lot of accountants. The way to grow is to keep moving and keep learning. If you stick around where you are comfortable, you're more likely to just be comfortable in your bubble. Moving on and getting new experiences is a great way to gain experience.

 

I'm not sure you can ever get comfortable for very long being manager of the Red Sox.

[a700hitter]

I'm not sure you can ever get comfortable for very long being manager of the Red Sox.

He has been here long enough. No Division win this year and adios as far as I am concerned.

[Slasher9]

Sigh.....

 

sorry Kimmi. couldnt resist.

[Bellhorn04]

It's not the steal attempt but the game situation it happened in. The Sox had just scored to come within one run. They had a base runner on. The best way to get him home is for the batter(s) behind him to get on base safely. So if Rutledge gets on base it is up to the next batter. As long as you don't make the last out, you have a chance to score the tying run.

 

If you operated on that philosophy, though, you would never attempt a steal with 2 outs for fear of ending the inning.

[devildavid]

If you operated on that philosophy, though, you would never attempt a steal with 2 outs for fear of ending the inning.

 

Let's just say it would require special conditions to do it. For example, if the game is tied or if you are ahead, the risk is not as bad as far as impacting the game outcome.

[mvp 78]

If you operated on that philosophy, though, you would never attempt a steal with 2 outs for fear of ending the inning.

 

And if you never attempt it, or at least it's very rare, opponents will get an advantage by not worrying about the runner at 1st.

[devildavid]

And if you never attempt it, or at least it's very rare, opponents will get an advantage by not worrying about the runner at 1st.

 

Not necessarily so. It depends on how big a lead the base runner takes. You still don't want them to get too big a jump on a hit.

[Maxbialystock]

I'm just saying I didn't like the move and I don't know if Farrell made the call. Whether or not JBJ stole the base a hitter after him would still have to get on base safely for the Sox to have a chance to score. JBJ is not going to steal his way home. With two outs, the best way to get him home is for following batters to reach base safely. (Yes, there are other scenarios involving wild pitches and passed balls, but these seem like a greater long shot.)

 

Bottom line, if JBJ stays put on first the tying run remains on base until the last out is made. Stealing is always a risk and a worse risk with two outs.

 

Sorry, but I can't buy that. If JBJ had already stolen 24 of 26 bases, the odds were very high he would be successful in getting to 2b on his own, which would then mean a single would score him. I like those odds more than I do getting another hit or walk to get JBJ to 2d base before the single to bring him home.

 

I also suspect that JBJ took off on his own because the batter did not swing.