Farrell

[Kimmi]

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.

 

Nice. I may have to start using the word 'funny' instead of 'random'. LOL

 

Good post, BTW.

[Kimmi]

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.

 

Stolen bases are another one of those things that are overrated.

 

That said, JBJ has an excellent stolen base rate, so I do not have much of an issue with him attempting a steal there.

 

That said, the batter at the plate has a better chance of getting a hit with a runner on 1B than he does with a runner on 2B.

[cp176]

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.

 

it was a move that made solid baseball sense.

[oldtimer]

Last night, Farrell used his bull pen to get the win with a game in hand. I think he made smart moves and we got the win. One star for Farrell.

[sk7326]

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

 

So managers matter then?

 

Managers control playing time! That matters a ton. Far and away the most important function.

 

What is interesting is that - for the most part, if you err on the side of sitting on your hands and let the players figure it out ... you'll probably get a better result than executing lots of showy moves which end up giving outs away.

[sk7326]

Nice. I may have to start using the word 'funny' instead of 'random'. LOL

 

Good post, BTW.

 

I use funny - not random. Baseball has a ton of randomness. But the reason there is so much noise is the oversized importance of the pitcher. (this is a lot like goaltending in hockey)

 

A pitcher can destroy every player advantage another team has ... and since teams use 4-6 man rotations (depending on situation), it is very rare that the best team in the league is fielding the best 9 players in every single game.

[a700hitter]

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

 

So managers matter then?

I think what is being said by some people is that managers don't matter in matters that affect the outcome of games, but managers do matter for things and aspects for which there is no measurable metric or outcome. In this way, they can avoid accountability unless they are a Valentine-like douche.

[devildavid]

Last night, Farrell used his bull pen to get the win with a game in hand. I think he made smart moves and we got the win. One star for Farrell.

 

I think he should have left Barnes in to get the final out of the 8th.

[devildavid]

Stolen bases are another one of those things that are overrated.

 

That said, JBJ has an excellent stolen base rate, so I do not have much of an issue with him attempting a steal there.

 

That said, the batter at the plate has a better chance of getting a hit with a runner on 1B than he does with a runner on 2B.

 

My issue was doing it while being behind a run with two outs in the inning.

[Bellhorn04]

I think he should have left Barnes in to get the final out of the 8th.

 

Reasoning?

[sk7326]

I think what is being said by some people is that managers don't matter in matters that affect the outcome of games, but managers do matter for things and aspects for which there is no measurable metric or outcome. In this way, they can avoid accountability unless they are a Valentine-like douche.

 

The frustrating thing is the accountability is more with regards to achieving management goals. There have been good 70 win jobs and bad 92 win ones.

[devildavid]

Reasoning?

 

Other than allowing the double, Barnes was pitching good and I thought he could get out of the jam. And I didn't want to have Kimbrel throw too many pitches.

[a700hitter]

Other than allowing the double, Barnes was pitching good and I thought he could get out of the jam. And I didn't want to have Kimbrel throw too many pitches.

Other than the double? I didn't trust him, but I wouldn't have faulted Farrell for giving Barnes one more batter.

[devildavid]

Other than the double? I didn't trust him, but I wouldn't have faulted Farrell for giving Barnes one more batter.

 

Why didn't your trust him? After the double he got a ground ball out and a popup.

[Bellhorn04]

Why didn't your trust him? After the double he got a ground ball out and a popup.

 

I don't think 'trust' is the right word. Barnes gives up a lot more baserunners and runs on average than Kimbrel, it's as simple as that.

[illinoisredsox]

Why didn't your trust him? After the double he got a ground ball out and a popup.

 

Part of Farrell's thinking may have been this:

 

Careerwise, going into last night, Gregorius vs. Barnes 2-4 with a BB, a HBP and 1 K, Gregorius vs. Kimbrel 0-3 with 3 K's (now 0-4 with 4 Ks)

 

This is part of the info that most of us don't have at our fingertips while sitting in our armchairs.

Edited June 7, 2017 by illinoisredsox

[oldtimer]

Why didn't your trust him? After the double he got a ground ball out and a popup.

Barnes and other relievers keep getting themselves into 3 and 2 counts by wasting pitches that no batter will swing at (too far out of the zone). He could either have walked the next guy, putting the lead run at the play or ben forced to come in over the plate. Neither was a good option. By bringing in his best at that point, Farrell wanted to do all he could to prevent the run from coming in from 3rd and risking any further damage. As it turned out, Kimbrel threw perhaps too good a hard curve, struck out the batter but it wasn't blocked leading to a run and a batter on. Kimbrel did strike out the side in the 9th though to save the game.

 

We saw Red Sox pitchers all night going into deep counts. Pomeranz threw 123 pitches to get through 5 innings. Relievers had to go 4 full innings. Scott, Kelly and Barnes all were used as was Kimbrel. Barnes should be available to pitch some tonight but perhaps Kimbrel will not be. It depends on how wants to set up for followon games. Only the manager will have reports on how each pitcher is feeling so he has to make the decision but if we are ahead late in the game, I would use Kimbrel, if at all possible.

[Bellhorn04]

Part of Farrell's thinking may have been this:

 

Careerwise, going into last night, Gregorius vs. Barnes 2-4 with a BB, a HBP and 1 K, Gregorius vs. Kimbrel 0-3 with 3 K's (now 0-4 with 4 Ks)

 

This is part of the info that most of us don't at our fingertips have sitting in our armchairs.

 

Exactly right.

[devildavid]

Part of Farrell's thinking may have been this:

 

Careerwise, going into last night, Gregorius vs. Barnes 2-4 with a BB, a HBP and 1 K, Gregorius vs. Kimbrel 0-3 with 3 K's (now 0-4 with 4 Ks)

 

This is part of the info that most of us don't at our fingertips have sitting in our armchairs.

 

Very small sample sizes. Can't conclude a whole lot from them.

[Bellhorn04]

Very small sample sizes. Can't conclude a whole lot from them.

 

But when you combine it with Kimbrel's vastly better overall numbers there's a lot saying to bring him in.

[devildavid]

Barnes and other relievers keep getting themselves into 3 and 2 counts by wasting pitches that no batter will swing at (too far out of the zone). He could either have walked the next guy, putting the lead run at the play or ben forced to come in over the plate. Neither was a good option. By bringing in his best at that point, Farrell wanted to do all he could to prevent the run from coming in from 3rd and risking any further damage. As it turned out, Kimbrel threw perhaps too good a hard curve, struck out the batter but it wasn't blocked leading to a run and a batter on. Kimbrel did strike out the side in the 9th though to save the game.

 

We saw Red Sox pitchers all night going into deep counts. Pomeranz threw 123 pitches to get through 5 innings. Relievers had to go 4 full innings. Scott, Kelly and Barnes all were used as was Kimbrel. Barnes should be available to pitch some tonight but perhaps Kimbrel will not be. It depends on how wants to set up for followon games. Only the manager will have reports on how each pitcher is feeling so he has to make the decision but if we are ahead late in the game, I would use Kimbrel, if at all possible.

 

Barnes threw 16 pitches to 3 batters. Kimbrel wound up facing 5 batters and throwing 30 pitches. After the fluke strikeout that went bad, he walked the next batter in the eighth, putting the tying run on base. I'd rather be sure to have Kimbrel available for the next game than Barnes.

[devildavid]

But when you combine it with Kimbrel's vastly better overall numbers there's a lot saying to bring him in.

 

It was not a critical situation. Sox were up by two runs with a man on 3rd and two outs. The game was not really in jeopardy at that point.

[illinoisredsox]

Very small sample sizes. Can't conclude a whole lot from them.

 

Yes, but that is true of virtually all pitcher-batter match-ups, especially when it involves the bullpen. Example, David Ortiz vs. Mariano Rivera. They potentially faced each other for 17 years (1997-2013, but I don't know if they saw each other every year in that span, especially with Ortiz in Minnesota for the first 6). Per Rotoworld, Big Papi (along with Jason Varitek) had the most plate appearances against Rivera of any player. It was all of 31 (averaging less than 2 a year). If they NEVER saw each other the first six years, it still would average under 3 per season in Boston, and that's with playing 18-19 games a year.

 

Slim as the numbers are, it's the best info they have.

 

Leaving Barnes in was defensible. So was bringing in Kimbrel.

Edited June 7, 2017 by illinoisredsox

[illinoisredsox]

Barring injury, Porcello will eat innings tonight. It's what he does, He'll give them 6-7, saving the pen. If he gets lit up, he knows the deal and he'll take one for the team and it won't carry over to his next start.

[Bellhorn04]

It was not a critical situation. Sox were up by two runs with a man on 3rd and two outs. The game was not really in jeopardy at that point.

 

All I can say is...what?

[Jasonbay44]

It was not a critical situation. Sox were up by two runs with a man on 3rd and two outs. The game was not really in jeopardy at that point.

 

How is that not a critical situation? Didi was a left handed hitter at Yankee Stadium and was the tying run in the 8th inning of a game. Plus Barnes is prone to giving up bombs.

[devildavid]

All I can say is...what?

 

After the double, the tying run was at the plate for two batters. Then Barnes got two outs while the runner moved to third. Why is that situation so critical for Kimbrel to have to come into the game?

[Maxbialystock]

Part of Farrell's thinking may have been this:

 

Careerwise, going into last night, Gregorius vs. Barnes 2-4 with a BB, a HBP and 1 K, Gregorius vs. Kimbrel 0-3 with 3 K's (now 0-4 with 4 Ks)

 

This is part of the info that most of us don't have at our fingertips while sitting in our armchairs.

 

I would have left Barnes in, but those numbers are compelling. Thanks.

[Bellhorn04]

After the double, the tying run was at the plate for two batters. Then Barnes got two outs while the runner moved to third. Why is that situation so critical for Kimbrel to have to come into the game?

 

Exactly what Jasonbay44 said. A lefthanded hitter with some power + short right field porch.

[notin]

Managers control playing time! That matters a ton. Far and away the most important function.

 

What is interesting is that - for the most part, if you err on the side of sitting on your hands and let the players figure it out ... you'll probably get a better result than executing lots of showy moves which end up giving outs away.

 

While very true, too many fans hate that type of manager. It was the msin criticism of Francona. ..