Farrell

[moonslav59]

Because if he can't help this team, managers are useless and A700 is right about just letting fan vote determine all moves.

 

I'm not saying managers can't and don't make a difference.

 

I'm saying depending on JF to suddenly begin helping this team with the choices he makes is not something I believe will happen.

 

I don't think tigers change their stripes, at least overnight.

[mvp 78]

I'm not saying managers can't and don't make a difference.

 

I'm saying depending on JF to suddenly begin helping this team with the choices he makes is not something I believe will happen.

 

I don't think tigers change their stripes, at least overnight.

 

Sometimes, outside forces can dramatically impact a tiger's stripes.

 

@PeteAbe

 

With what amounts to an extra starter in Nunez and wanting to keep Holt and Young involved, be prepared for daily lineup changes.

[bosoxmal]

Maybe it;s time for a new thread!Wading through 50+ pages to see what folks are thinking is a little much. I had come to the conclusion that JF should get into a a whitle color job, He;s very articulate but with little imagination.

 

That may be changing. Changing his lineup every other game hasgiven the players something to think about and get almost excited about. Where do I hit today? Might be interesting, right? I'm finally thinking JF has an imagination chord.

[Maxbialystock]

I'm not saying managers can't and don't make a difference.

 

I'm saying depending on JF to suddenly begin helping this team with the choices he makes is not something I believe will happen.

 

I don't think tigers change their stripes, at least overnight.

 

I believe managers should be evaluated solely on the W-L record and whether, in the judgment of the front office, the team over- or under-performed.

 

Thus about a month ago or maybe less I unleashed a tirade against Farrell.

 

All that said, I believe the manager can only do so much with the hitting. Clearly, Nunez and Devers, new last month, are making a difference. I think Farrell is doing a decent job of using those additions to improve the hitting overall, but truly believe most of it is up the players.

 

The pitching, I think, is a little different. Managers have a whole lot of say on how long a starter stays in, what relievers to use and in what order, how long, etc. Again, Farrell was greatly helped when DD went out and got Sale. On the other hand, Price has been on and off and on the DL, so has ERod, who has also been inconsistent, Porcello has been awful, Fister was awful until he got better the last two games (but had already cost us some losses), etc. The bullpen, the manager's most important tool, has been pretty darn good this year, and this has certainly helped Farrell. Of course, just maybe--perish the thought--he gets a little credit for the way he uses his relievers.

 

Back to my first point. I find it very difficult to climb on the "fire Farrell" bandwagon when the Sox are on a 7 game winning streak and 4 games up on the Yankees, 3 games on the Guardians, 6.5 on both the Rays and the Royals, etc.

 

On the other hand, one thing that bothers me sometimes is weak fundamentals--are so they seem to me. My favorite is the number of times Sox pitchers have failed to cover first on a grounder to the right side. These guys are all veterans. More to the point, Sale is great on the fundamentals, and he sure as heck wasn't trained by Farrell or his coaching staff.

 

I agree the baserunning can be bad, but, guess what, every other team in MLB does the same things. Last night JBJ ran all the way to 3b on a deep fly ball, caught easily, to left field and was doubled off of first base. Terrible. But at almost the same time Cleveland had a man on first and one man out. The batter hit a popup in the vicinity of the mound. The thirdbaseman and the pitcher let it drop between them onto the mound. The thirdbaseman grabbed it, fumbled it, and finally got the runner going to 2b. Then the SS threw the ball to first and beat the batter who had between 2 and 3 hours to get to first base safely and could not be bothered.

[moonslav59]

Maybe it;s time for a new thread!Wading through 50+ pages to see what folks are thinking is a little much. I had come to the conclusion that JF should get into a a whitle color job, He;s very articulate but with little imagination.

 

That may be changing. Changing his lineup every other game hasgiven the players something to think about and get almost excited about. Where do I hit today? Might be interesting, right? I'm finally thinking JF has an imagination chord.

 

Someone said the reason Jf had Holt bat second the other day was so others could stay in their comfort zone by remaining in their normal batting slot.

 

The line-ups have been jumbled all year. Hardly anyone has stayed in the same slot. That's not my issue. I'm not big on the philosophy that batters do better when they know what slot they will bat in all year long.

 

The line-up issues I have problems with is that the players he has kept in slots the longest didn't belong there. He kept Moreland batting 4th and 5th when the whole world could see he was struggling. What was that based on? 6-8 weeks of hot hitting? Moreland's whole career screamed of being a platoon batter for the 7-8 slot, yet JF kept him FT way too long and batting 4th or 5th way, way, way too long. I have issues with Betts batting first when he sees so few RBI opportunities and our team has such a lack of power, but at least Betts gets more PAs.

 

Injuries and slumps have played a role in some changes, but here's a look at our batting slots:

GS'd

 

1st

81 Betts

18 Pedey

9 Bogey

4 Holt (WTF!)

1 Nunez

 

2nd (Some studies show best overall hitter goes here)

50 Beni

49 Pedey

4 Nunez & Young

3 Holt (WTF!)

1 JBJ & Rutledge (WTF!)

 

3rd

60 Bogey (stayed here too long as he slumped)

26 Betts

13 Pedey

8 Beni

4 Nunez

1 JBJ & Young

 

4th

50 HRam

40 Moreland

17 Beni

1 Beni & Nunez

 

5th

32 HRam

28 Moreland

15 JBJ

12 Beni & Young

5 Devers

4 Bogey

3 Travis

2 Pablo

 

6th

27 JBJ

22 Bogey

16 Moreland

13 Young

9 Beni

8 HRam

5 Pedey & Travis

3 Rutledge

2 Devers

1 Selsky, Leon, Vaz

 

7th

35 JBJ

14 Rutledge

12 Pablo

11 leon & Vaz

9 Young

8 Moreland

4 Travis

3 Bogey

2 Holt & Marrero

1 Marco & Beni

 

8th

32 Vaz

30 Leon

12 Pablo

10 JBJ

7 Rutledge

5 Young & Marrero

4 Lin

3 Marco

2 Moreland & Holt

1 Devers

 

9th

36 Marrero

14 Vaz & Marco

13 Leon

10 Lin

8 Holt

5 JBJ

4 Devers

1 Rutledge

2 ERod, 1 5 other pitchers

 

Looking at some individual players:

 

Moreland:

40 GS up 4th .725 OPS

28 GS up 5th .733

That's 68 games out of our 113 games! More than half of our games with a career .754 OPS guy and 99+ OPS+ (2017 OPS: .754 and 97 OPS+)

16 GS up 6th .818

10 GS up 7th and 8th

Sorry, but this is, at best, borderline insanity. I get that he carried us for much of the first 3 months. He was one of the few players that over-performed to start the year, but he started returning to career form around June 27th. Moreland hit 4th for 6 days in a row in early July and 11 games out of 15 games from july 4th to 21st. JF moved him to 5th, 6th or 7th starting on the 23rd.

That's almost a month of foot-dragging due to apparent loyalty or "rewards program" based on previous (perhaps outlier) success.

 

JBJ has been hot and cold this year, but his OPS is about equal to HRam's and better than Moreland and Bogey's.

35 GS up 7th .792

27 GS up 6th .868

15 GS up 5th .480

10 GS up 8th .888

5 GS up 9th .650 (despite "protection" from Betts, I might add)

I don't get batting JBJ 8th or 9th, when he's been a top 5 or 6 hitter this year. (At one point he had our 2nd best OPS but was not moved up.)

 

Bogaerts

60 GS up 3rd .785 (with very little power)

22 GS up 6th

9 GS up 1st .839 (seemed like a good slot for a high OBP low SLG guy)

4 GS up 5th .450

3 GS up 7th .385 (finally moved down during slump)

1 GS up 2nd .250

He had an OPS above .840 for much of the end of May and remained over .800 all June, but then he had started slumping in June. JF waited until July 17th to move Bogey down, and even then he put him 5th. He's just about our worst power guy.

 

Moving Betts to lead-off has already been beaten to death.

 

This isn't Monday morning quarterbacking on my part. I've been saying this from the start.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Kimmi]

Winning has a way of doing that to those easily influenced be short sample size results. IMO, JF has made several poor choices during this winning stretch, and it doesn't change the fact that we can and often do, win despite JF, not because of him.

 

 

Moon, don't start with the 'we won in spite of him' argument.

 

Winning may have a way of swaying one's opinion, but so does losing. In your opinion, Farrell has made many poor choices. Perhaps the choices weren't actually poor, or at least not as bad as you think they were.

 

For one, I know you've been on him about batting Moreland 4th for so long. Probably not the best spot for him, but I promise you, it wasn't that big of a deal.

[Kimmi]

Because if he can't help this team, managers are useless and A700 is right about just letting fan vote determine all moves.

 

Managers in game decisions do not impact a game all that much.

[Kimmi]

Maybe it;s time for a new thread!Wading through 50+ pages to see what folks are thinking is a little much. I had come to the conclusion that JF should get into a a whitle color job, He;s very articulate but with little imagination.

 

That may be changing. Changing his lineup every other game hasgiven the players something to think about and get almost excited about. Where do I hit today? Might be interesting, right? I'm finally thinking JF has an imagination chord.

 

I think he's pulling his line ups out of a hat!

[moonslav59]

I believe managers should be evaluated solely on the W-L record and whether, in the judgment of the front office, the team over- or under-performed.

 

Thus about a month ago or maybe less I unleashed a tirade against Farrell.

 

All that said, I believe the manager can only do so much with the hitting. Clearly, Nunez and Devers, new last month, are making a difference. I think Farrell is doing a decent job of using those additions to improve the hitting overall, but truly believe most of it is up the players.

 

The pitching, I think, is a little different. Managers have a whole lot of say on how long a starter stays in, what relievers to use and in what order, how long, etc. Again, Farrell was greatly helped when DD went out and got Sale. On the other hand, Price has been on and off and on the DL, so has ERod, who has also been inconsistent, Porcello has been awful, Fister was awful until he got better the last two games (but had already cost us some losses), etc. The bullpen, the manager's most important tool, has been pretty darn good this year, and this has certainly helped Farrell. Of course, just maybe--perish the thought--he gets a little credit for the way he uses his relievers.

 

Back to my first point. I find it very difficult to climb on the "fire Farrell" bandwagon when the Sox are on a 7 game winning streak and 4 games up on the Yankees, 3 games on the Guardians, 6.5 on both the Rays and the Royals, etc.

 

On the other hand, one thing that bothers me sometimes is weak fundamentals--are so they seem to me. My favorite is the number of times Sox pitchers have failed to cover first on a grounder to the right side. These guys are all veterans. More to the point, Sale is great on the fundamentals, and he sure as heck wasn't trained by Farrell or his coaching staff.

 

I agree the baserunning can be bad, but, guess what, every other team in MLB does the same things. Last night JBJ ran all the way to 3b on a deep fly ball, caught easily, to left field and was doubled off of first base. Terrible. But at almost the same time Cleveland had a man on first and one man out. The batter hit a popup in the vicinity of the mound. The thirdbaseman and the pitcher let it drop between them onto the mound. The thirdbaseman grabbed it, fumbled it, and finally got the runner going to 2b. Then the SS threw the ball to first and beat the batter who had between 2 and 3 hours to get to first base safely and could not be bothered.

 

Our players can't even keep track of how many outs there are.

 

That's just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to mistakes in fundamentals this team has demonstrated. It's a reflection of poor management.

 

True, you don't fire a manager during a hot streak, but the recent winning stretch doesn't change the underlying fact that this team, even when winning is showing a strikingly high level of mental mistakes.

 

I don't give credit to JF for the great play by Devers and Nunez. I'm glad he moved both up quickly in the line-up, so maybe he's finally smelling the coffee a little bit, but win or lose, JF is not a good manager.

 

I wouldn't can him now. I'm not sure who is out there right now, but if we go on to lose 6 or 7 in a row, the dump JF posters will come out again. Should these decisions really be affected by a 7 game winning or losing streak?

 

JF is not a good manager. In my opinion, it's crystal clear. Even winning a ring this year will not change my opinion, but it will mean JF will be back next year (and maybe longer).

[moonslav59]

Moon, don't start with the 'we won in spite of him' argument.

 

Winning may have a way of swaying one's opinion, but so does losing. In your opinion, Farrell has made many poor choices. Perhaps the choices weren't actually poor, or at least not as bad as you think they were.

 

For one, I know you've been on him about batting Moreland 4th for so long. Probably not the best spot for him, but I promise you, it wasn't that big of a deal.

 

It's a sign of cluelessness.

 

I think he might be worse than I think, because I am usually one to blame the manager for much of anything.

 

When we made him the new manager, I thought he'd be good. This isn't some personal vendetta I've held towards him.

 

I never get a feeling that JF has contributed to a win. Maybe my way of looking at team management has changed recently, but I don't think so. This team is severely lacking in fundamentals. There's no end in sight. It's almost like we are making more mental mistakes as the year goes on.

 

I get that the manager hardly matters as you imply, and that's why I say we are winning despite JF.

 

We've had big injuries this year. I don't really even blame JF for just about every batter doing worse than last year, but I suppose it could be his lack of action, or lack of pro-activity, or his choice of coaches. We've been winning anyways. I just don't see any of our winning being attributed to JF's brilliance.

 

[Kimmi]

It's a sign of cluelessness.

 

I think he might be worse than I think, because I am usually one to blame the manager for much of anything.

 

When we made him the new manager, I thought he'd be good. This isn't some personal vendetta I've held towards him.

 

I never get a feeling that JF has contributed to a win. Maybe my way of looking at team management has changed recently, but I don't think so. This team is severely lacking in fundamentals. There's no end in sight. It's almost like we are making more mental mistakes as the year goes on.

 

I get that the manager hardly matters as you imply, and that's why I say we are winning despite JF.

 

We've had big injuries this year. I don't really even blame JF for just about every batter doing worse than last year, but I suppose it could be his lack of action, or lack of pro-activity, or his choice of coaches. We've been winning anyways. I just don't see any of our winning being attributed to JF's brilliance.

 

 

Well, our winning isn't due to Farrell's brilliance, but nor is our losing. The same can be said about teams and managers across baseball. Farrell is not clueless. He would not be in the position he is in if he were clueless.

 

As I've said before, I believe it is fair to question what is going on with Farrell and the coaches as far as underperformance, lack of fundamentals, and mental lapses are concerned. However, in game decisions, IMO, have been no better or no worse than most managers.

[moonslav59]

Well, our winning isn't due to Farrell's brilliance, but nor is our losing. The same can be said about teams and managers across baseball. Farrell is not clueless. He would not be in the position he is in if he were clueless.

 

As I've said before, I believe it is fair to question what is going on with Farrell and the coaches as far as underperformance, lack of fundamentals, and mental lapses are concerned. However, in game decisions, IMO, have been no better or no worse than most managers.

 

I usually don't even visit the game threads due to too much game decision bashing. (I also watch games on tape delay most of the time.) I agree on in-game decisions and JF, but even then, I never get a sense that he out thinks the opponent's manager. My issues are not about in game choices. It's with preparation, motivation and slow adjustments like waiting to move slumping players out of key batting order slots. I know many of these decisions do not amount to much in terms of runs created, but I'd like to get a sense that our manager is doing his best to maximize our chances of winning- not necessarily game by game, but over the full season.

 

I've been a little more encouraged by the recent line-up changes, so maybe tigers can change their stripes overnight. I'm trying to optimistic, but the continual mental mistakes are killing me! Even the old Sox of the 70's to 90's weren't this bad on fundamentals, and they were pretty bad.

[Kimmi]

I usually don't even visit the game threads due to too much game decision bashing. (I also watch games on tape delay most of the time.) I agree on in-game decisions and JF, but even then, I never get a sense that he out thinks the opponent's manager. My issues are not about in game choices. It's with preparation, motivation and slow adjustments like waiting to move slumping players out of key batting order slots. I know many of these decisions do not amount to much in terms of runs created, but I'd like to get a sense that our manager is doing his best to maximize our chances of winning- not necessarily game by game, but over the full season.

 

I've been a little more encouraged by the recent line-up changes, so maybe tigers can change their stripes overnight. I'm trying to optimistic, but the continual mental mistakes are killing me! Even the old Sox of the 70's to 90's weren't this bad on fundamentals, and they were pretty bad.

 

I agree with you about the mental mistakes and the sometimes lack of fundamentals. It is fair to question what is going on with the manager and coaches there.

 

As far as having a slow hook to move Moreland out of the clean up spot, line up decisions should not be made based on in season performance. Not that Moreland in the 4 spot was the best decision in the first place, but in terms of performance for the remainder of the season, valid rest of season projections trump season to date performance.

 

In other words, statistically speaking, don't move someone out of a spot because they are slumping. OTOH, there might be valid non-statistical reasons for moving someone out of a slot, like taking some pressure off of the player.

[moonslav59]

I agree with you about the mental mistakes and the sometimes lack of fundamentals. It is fair to question what is going on with the manager and coaches there.

 

As far as having a slow hook to move Moreland out of the clean up spot, line up decisions should not be made based on in season performance. Not that Moreland in the 4 spot was the best decision in the first place, but in terms of performance for the remainder of the season, valid rest of season projections trump season to date performance.

 

In other words, statistically speaking, don't move someone out of a spot because they are slumping. OTOH, there might be valid non-statistical reasons for moving someone out of a slot, like taking some pressure off of the player.

 

If a player has a long enough career which is pretty consistently mediocre, then I feel that player should not be given as long a rope as Moreland got.

 

I never understood why Bogey did not start the year in the one or two slot, especially on a team lacking power. His career norm and seasonal numbers screamed 1 or 2! At least until he started slumping badly. Placing him up 3rd was not smart, but keepinh him there was nothing short of idiotic. (I'm actually being kind using that word.)

[Kimmi]

If a player has a long enough career which is pretty consistently mediocre, then I feel that player should not be given as long a rope as Moreland got.

 

I never understood why Bogey did not start the year in the one or two slot, especially on a team lacking power. His career norm and seasonal numbers screamed 1 or 2! At least until he started slumping badly. Placing him up 3rd was not smart, but keepinh him there was nothing short of idiotic. (I'm actually being kind using that word.)

 

I am guessing if you look at the line ups of any teams, you will find some glaring 'mistakes', even from the managers that people consider the best.

 

On a side note, I just watched a movie that gave the 'medical' definitions of idiot, imbecile, and moron. Idiot (IQ of 0 - 25) is the lowest you can go. LOL

[Maxbialystock]

If a player has a long enough career which is pretty consistently mediocre, then I feel that player should not be given as long a rope as Moreland got.

 

I never understood why Bogey did not start the year in the one or two slot, especially on a team lacking power. His career norm and seasonal numbers screamed 1 or 2! At least until he started slumping badly. Placing him up 3rd was not smart, but keepinh him there was nothing short of idiotic. (I'm actually being kind using that word.)

 

Boy, I'm glad you said that because I strongly disagree. While I agree that statistically you want to put certain batters in certain slots, I think the difference that makes is pretty small. I think we agree that the loss of Ortiz has hurt, but should not have caused all the lower OPS's we have seen. As for Bogaerts in the third slot, Kimmi, who does think slots matter, says that statistics show the 3d spot is less important than 1, 2, 4, or 5, so there. Me, I like slotting hitters when that works and changing lineups when a set lineup doesn't. Plus platooning. But at the end of the day it really boils down to whether the guys are hitting or not. Thus I can never buy the adjective "idiotic" when referring to slotting a particular player in the lineup.

 

More. You like Farrell changing lineups now, and so do I. But the real reason why that's working is that Nunez and Devers gave this lineup a shot in the arm when it was really needed. Changing lineups might have helped a little and certainly did not harm, but a couple of good new bats is what really makes a difference.

[moonslav59]

I am guessing if you look at the line ups of any teams, you will find some glaring 'mistakes', even from the managers that people consider the best.

 

On a side note, I just watched a movie that gave the 'medical' definitions of idiot, imbecile, and moron. Idiot (IQ of 0 - 25) is the lowest you can go. LOL

 

Okay, maybe he's just an imbecile.

 

LOL

[moonslav59]

Boy, I'm glad you said that because I strongly disagree. While I agree that statistically you want to put certain batters in certain slots, I think the difference that makes is pretty small. I think we agree that the loss of Ortiz has hurt, but should not have caused all the lower OPS's we have seen. As for Bogaerts in the third slot, Kimmi, who does think slots matter, says that statistics show the 3d spot is less important than 1, 2, 4, or 5, so there. Me, I like slotting hitters when that works and changing lineups when a set lineup doesn't. Plus platooning. But at the end of the day it really boils down to whether the guys are hitting or not. Thus I can never buy the adjective "idiotic" when referring to slotting a particular player in the lineup.

 

More. You like Farrell changing lineups now, and so do I. But the real reason why that's working is that Nunez and Devers gave this lineup a shot in the arm when it was really needed. Changing lineups might have helped a little and certainly did not harm, but a couple of good new bats is what really makes a difference.

 

Just because the 3rd slot doesn't matter as much as many of us have thought for year, and the 2 and 4 slots are more important, doesn't mean the 3 slot is where you put your weakest power hitter.

 

For a long time Bogey was one of our top OBP guys and has always been low on SLG. That is the profile of a 1 or 2 slot hitter not 3 slot.

 

Batting Moreland 4th and 5th for what seemed like for ever was imbecilic! (Is that better, Kimmi?)

[Kimmi]

Boy, I'm glad you said that because I strongly disagree. While I agree that statistically you want to put certain batters in certain slots, I think the difference that makes is pretty small. I think we agree that the loss of Ortiz has hurt, but should not have caused all the lower OPS's we have seen. As for Bogaerts in the third slot, Kimmi, who does think slots matter, says that statistics show the 3d spot is less important than 1, 2, 4, or 5, so there. Me, I like slotting hitters when that works and changing lineups when a set lineup doesn't. Plus platooning. But at the end of the day it really boils down to whether the guys are hitting or not. Thus I can never buy the adjective "idiotic" when referring to slotting a particular player in the lineup.

 

More. You like Farrell changing lineups now, and so do I. But the real reason why that's working is that Nunez and Devers gave this lineup a shot in the arm when it was really needed. Changing lineups might have helped a little and certainly did not harm, but a couple of good new bats is what really makes a difference.

 

Just to clarify, while there is a way to optimize a line up, and putting your best hitter in the 3rd slot is not it, I am one who has said over and over that batting order does not make that much of a difference. All of the hand wringing over who bats where is mostly for naught.

[Kimmi]

Okay, maybe he's just an imbecile.

 

LOL

 

LOL That's better!

[Bellhorn04]

The 7 mainstays of our lineup have OPS's ranging from .801 to .743, so it's not like anyone is head and shoulders above the others so far this year.

[moonslav59]

Just to clarify, while there is a way to optimize a line up, and putting your best hitter in the 3rd slot is not it, I am one who has said over and over that batting order does not make that much of a difference. All of the hand wringing over who bats where is mostly for naught.

 

I understand the theory. I'm not one to argue with studies that show otherwise, but I tend to think line-ups matter more that the studies show they do. That being said, even if they don't matter much, a manager should do everything he can to eek out every small percentage advantage he can, and putting players in their best slots is one of the few tangible differences a manger can make.

 

Maybe I do obsess over the line-ups too much, but JF's line-ups bug me more than any other manager in recent memory.

[moonslav59]

The 7 mainstays of our lineup have OPS's ranging from .801 to .743, so it's not like anyone is head and shoulders above the others so far this year.

 

True, but there are big differences between early Moreland, Bogey & JBJ vs late Moreland, Bogey & JBJ. My main beef is with how slowly it took JF to move these guys. That and the fact that Bogey should never bat 3rd with the weakest power out of our top 8 hitters. Bogey's ISO is .122 this year.

 

2015-2017 Sox Leaders in ISO (400+ PAs)

.293 Ortiz

.210 JBJ (JF likes him up 9th)

.200 Young

.199 Betts

.195 HRam

.191 T Shaw

.180 Moreland

.156 Beni

.129 Pedey

.127 Leon

.126 Bogey

.123 Pablo

.103 Holt

.095 Vaz

 

Now, Bogey has the 3rd best OBP since 2014 (not counting Papi), so just bat the guy 1 or two, unless he's slumping so badly he doesn't belong there. HE SHOULD NEVER BAT 3rd, 4th or 5th. If it's not idiotic, it's imbelic. If it's not imbecilc, it's moronic.

 

OBP from 2014-2017:

.371 Pedey

.359 Beni

.351 Bogey

.350 Betts

.342 Young (BOS only)

.340 JBJ

.334 Holt

.334 HRam

.328 Swihart

.328 Moreland

.319 Leon

 

 

[Bellhorn04]

Bogey's numbers in the 3 slot this year - 279/336/449 - 785 OPS. The 449 SLG is higher than any of our regulars except Mookie's 458. I really think you're making much too big of a deal out of it.

[mvp 78]

Bogey has been fine this year. He's playing to what I expect out of him. He's not a superstar, he's just a solid major leaguer. The best part is that he probably won't cost $20/yr going forward.

[moonslav59]

Bogey's numbers in the 3 slot this year - 279/336/449 - 785 OPS. The 449 SLG is higher than any of our regulars except Mookie's 458. I really think you're making much too big of a deal out of it.

 

He was much higher and slumped for too long of a time before being moved down.

 

He doesn't have the power to bat 3-5.

 

It's not a big deal by itself.

[moonslav59]

I always try to take the long look, or at least "longer". I rarely get pissed off about one game, especially coming off a nice winning streak. What happened tonight was sickening. I know you can't blame JF for Nunez making a fundamental mistake. Nunez just joined the team not long ago, but running into that out in the ninth wasn't the first mental blunder of the game. It wasn't even the second one.

 

I don't want to go on and on, but I'm totally done with JF. I get how this isn't the time to make a change, but I'm totally done.

[Station 13]

Xander fits more in the 1-2 hole when things are going well. If he can taps into 20HR power, that is added bonus.

[moonslav59]

Xander fits more in the 1-2 hole when things are going well. If he can taps into 20HR power, that is added bonus.

 

Yes. He had a very good OBP for a few months. The one or two slots were made for Bogey, at least when he's not slumping.

[oldtimer]

Xander fits more in the 1-2 hole when things are going well. If he can taps into 20HR power, that is added bonus.

 

We all know Bogey is not going well now so JF needs to treat him accordingly. Move him down or rest him. When right , Bogey can help this team, in the meanwhile JF needs to consider alternatives.