Farrell

[Bellhorn04]

So last night was a good litmus test. Was JBJ simply aggressive or idiotic?

 

He was being aggressive because there were 2 outs and he represented the winning run not the tying run.

[cp176]

no question - aggressive. Game tied, winning run

[Spudboy]

So last night was a good litmus test. Was JBJ simply aggressive or idiotic?

 

Aggressive. He could have been out by a considerable distance if the relay throw had been closer to ideal.

 

It was a gamble that could win the game or it would fail and the game would remain tied giving the other team another chance to beat you.

 

I take that chance most of the time.

 

Stupid would have been to have put out by a good throw that arrives at the plate 15-30 feet before you do.

[Thunder]

Aggressive. He could have been out by a considerable distance if the relay throw had been closer to ideal.

 

It was a gamble that could win the game or it would fail and the game would remain tied giving the other team another chance to beat you.

 

I take that chance most of the time.

 

Stupid would have been to have put out by a good throw that arrives at the plate 15-30 feet before you do.

 

That was definitely the right move to make, especially considering our record in extra innings, and the fact that the Cardinals used three pitchers in the 9th. I like our bullpen against theirs if the game were to continue.

[S5Dewey]

Don't get me wrong, I love the running game. I like to see a team put the pressure on the defense.

 

However, there is an adage in baseball that the lower the league you are coaching in, the more your team should run. That is, Little Leaguers should run rampant, High school players less, college players even less, and, well, MLB is at the top of that list so they should run the least. And of course that's because of the defense. Usually even a "bad arm" in MLB would be pretty darn good anyplace else.

 

I don't take many issues with the planned running the Sox do. It's the crazy things that some players do on their own like trying to stretch a single off the wall into a double that bothers me. (Or trying to get from 2B to 3B on a ball that's hit in front of them! UGH!!)

[mvp 78]

Aggressive. He could have been out by a considerable distance if the relay throw had been closer to ideal.

 

It was a gamble that could win the game or it would fail and the game would remain tied giving the other team another chance to beat you.

 

I take that chance most of the time.

 

Stupid would have been to have put out by a good throw that arrives at the plate 15-30 feet before you do.

 

Stupid would have been to do that if there was only 1 out.

[Spudboy]

True.

[Kimmi]

So last night was a good litmus test. Was JBJ simply aggressive or idiotic?

 

Of course everyone is going to say aggressive, in hindsight, because he was safe. I can guarantee you that had he gotten thrown out, there would be several posts about how stupid Jackie was for trying to score on that play. Guaranteed.

[Dojji]

Possibly, but couch-potato analytics did suggest a very favorable risk-reward ratio.

[Bellhorn04]

Possibly, but couch-potato analytics did suggest a very favorable risk-reward ratio.

 

Couch-potato analytics...I love it.

[Kimmi]

Possibly, but couch-potato analytics did suggest a very favorable risk-reward ratio.

 

Nope, it's all about 20/20 hindsight.

[a700hitter]

Of course everyone is going to say aggressive, in hindsight, because he was safe. I can guarantee you that had he gotten thrown out, there would be several posts about how stupid Jackie was for trying to score on that play. Guaranteed.

There were 2 outs and it was the winning run and it would take a perfect relay to get him so it was a good move. If there had been one out, it would not have been a good move. This team has been making an inordinate number of outs with one out or no outs. Aggressiveness is not a good defens for those. Stupidity is a good explanation for those moves.

[OH FOY]

Are they seriously going to be Pitching Fister Sunday? That could be a huge game. I don't know about that. Edited August 18, 2017 by OH FOY!

[Bellhorn04]

Are they seriously going to be Pitching Fister Sunday night? That could be a huge game. I don't know about that.

 

We have no more off-days till September 7, so yeah, it'll probably be Fister. At least he won't be pitching against Cleveland.

[devildavid]

There were 2 outs and it was the winning run and it would take a perfect relay to get him so it was a good move. If there had been one out, it would not have been a good move. This team has been making an inordinate number of outs with one out or no outs. Aggressiveness is not a good defens for those. Stupidity is a good explanation for those moves.

 

If you want to call it stupidity fine, but it is Farrell's stupidity that is to blame. It is his philosophy of base running that the team follows. They are encouraged to be aggressive on the bases. This means they will run into outs that appear to be stupid. But they aren't making decisions each time, they are following a general philosophy that Farrell encourages. He thinks the rewards outweigh the risks of consistently being aggressive on the bases. I strongly disagree with him. But eliminating so-called stupid decisions is not the real problem here. It is the coaching philosophy.

 

Yeah, I know its more fun to call something stupid.

[cp176]

Of course everyone is going to say aggressive, in hindsight, because he was safe. I can guarantee you that had he gotten thrown out, there would be several posts about how stupid Jackie was for trying to score on that play. Guaranteed.

 

I think that it is also reasonable to assume that even though he was safe, there are plenty of people who did and would disagree with the move.

[moonslav59]

If you want to call it stupidity fine, but it is Farrell's stupidity that is to blame. It is his philosophy of base running that the team follows. They are encouraged to be aggressive on the bases. This means they will run into outs that appear to be stupid. But they aren't making decisions each time, they are following a general philosophy that Farrell encourages. He thinks the rewards outweigh the risks of consistently being aggressive on the bases. I strongly disagree with him. But eliminating so-called stupid decisions is not the real problem here. It is the coaching philosophy.

 

Yeah, I know its more fun to call something stupid.

 

There is a line between agressive and stupid. When they sent JBJ, before I even saw the throw, I said to myself, "they should send him". But I wasn't the 3B coach. If JBJ was out by 30 feet, then one could say that was stupid.

[OH FOY]

With 2 outs off with the hit, good runner, game was tied up, you force the issue, play in Outfield has to be good, throw to relay man, who in turns has to make a good throw, with Catcher making the play. This is moving fast, in a pressure situation. It was an excellent gamble. Because of situation. More things has to go right for the Defense, to succeed.

And it didn't.

Edited August 18, 2017 by OH FOY!

[Kimmi]

Are they seriously going to be Pitching Fister Sunday? That could be a huge game. I don't know about that.

 

They have decided to go with Porcello.

[Kimmi]

If you want to call it stupidity fine, but it is Farrell's stupidity that is to blame. It is his philosophy of base running that the team follows. They are encouraged to be aggressive on the bases. This means they will run into outs that appear to be stupid. But they aren't making decisions each time, they are following a general philosophy that Farrell encourages. He thinks the rewards outweigh the risks of consistently being aggressive on the bases. I strongly disagree with him. But eliminating so-called stupid decisions is not the real problem here. It is the coaching philosophy.

 

Yeah, I know its more fun to call something stupid.

 

So far, the rewards have outweighed the risks. Not by much, but they have.

[moonslav59]

So far, the rewards have outweighed the risks. Not by much, but they have.

 

If they could have eliminated half the "stupid" plays, we'd be highly out-weighed.

[mvp 78]

If they could have eliminated half the "stupid" plays, we'd be highly out-weighed.

 

And may have an extra game or two in hand. Helpful for a pennant race.

[Maxbialystock]

If they could have eliminated half the "stupid" plays, we'd be highly out-weighed.

 

Darn right. JBJ should be fined for scoring the winning run from 1b on a double of the green monster. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

 

Or just maybe great baseball.

[Maxbialystock]

There is a line between agressive and stupid. When they sent JBJ, before I even saw the throw, I said to myself, "they should send him". But I wasn't the 3B coach. If JBJ was out by 30 feet, then one could say that was stupid.

 

I thought you said on an earlier post that, had JBJ been out, Farrell would again deserve to be fired.

[Kimmi]

If they could have eliminated half the "stupid" plays, we'd be highly out-weighed.

 

I agree with this. That being said, I think many of the so called 'stupid' plays weren't really stupid, they just didn't work out. I'm not saying we haven't had any stupid ones, just that I don't think we've had as many stupid ones as some posters believe we have.

[moonslav59]

I thought you said on an earlier post that, had JBJ been out, Farrell would again deserve to be fired.

 

I said I wasn't the 3B coach, and if he'd been thrown out by 30 feet, then the play could be called "stupid".

 

In that situation, you have to send the guy, unless you are pretty sure he'd be thrown out.

[moonslav59]

I agree with this. That being said, I think many of the so called 'stupid' plays weren't really stupid, they just didn't work out. I'm not saying we haven't had any stupid ones, just that I don't think we've had as many stupid ones as some posters believe we have.

 

I'm talking stupid plays like forgetting how many outs there are, trying to take 3B with no outs, not watching the runner in front of you hold up on the base you're heading towards, and so on...

 

Being aggressive is not stupid. Being way over aggressive often is.

[oldtimer]

I'm talking stupid plays like forgetting how many outs there are, trying to take 3B with no outs, not watching the runner in front of you hold up on the base you're heading towards, and so on...

Down one in the 9th with one out we sent Holt. I didn't like it.

[illinoisredsox]

I'm talking stupid plays like forgetting how many outs there are, trying to take 3B with no outs, not watching the runner in front of you hold up on the base you're heading towards, and so on...

Down one in the 9th with one out we sent Holt. I didn't like it.

 

No issue with sending Holt. Betances has a high leg kick, he should be relatively easy to run on. Sanchez made a perfect throw.

 

One thing I'd like to see is more feet first sliding. One of the reasons Holt was out was that Gregorious was blocking forcing Holt to go around him diving in. Go in feet first and infielders might stop blocking bases so often.

[devildavid]

So far, the rewards have outweighed the risks. Not by much, but they have.

 

How do you come up with that? I'm not sure there is an easy way to figure out games that were lost due to this base running philosophy. It is easier to point out specific game winning occurrences but how do you come up with a calculation of lost opportunities to score more runs? How many games might have turned out differently if they had not run into outs on the bases?