Farrell

[Spudboy]

What is your point? The Boss died in 2010 and suffered from dementia for his last few years. Girardi was hired in 2008. If the Boss was still alive and in his right mind, Girardi would have been gone years ago. The sons don't have the same intolerance for losing.

 

I've seen Jacko demolish Girardi several times too.

[a700hitter]

I've seen Jacko demolish Girardi several times too.

They hate the guy down here. They absolutely despise him.

[Maxbialystock]

The reason why Girardi has lasted so long is because the Boss is gone. The Boss would have fired him years ago. The Yankee fans on this board are not very representative of Yankee fans in NY who regularly call talk radio to rip Girardi.

 

Really? Yankees fans whose team pays a king's ransom for players are mad at the manager for not winning more WS (the Yankees have won 27 overall)? Astounding. Maybe they're spoiled rotten, just as we might be becoming now that the 86 year drought has been semi-eradicated by not one but three WS titles. Or maybe they should be blaming the guy (Cashman) who has basically spent that king's ransom.

 

In any case, try building the case against Girardi the same way you have built the case against Farrell. Show me the weak fundamentals, the endless mental blunders, the pervasive boneheadedness. Show me all those lousy pitching decisions. You know, all that bad stuff that makes Farrell so worthless.

 

And, while you are at it, don't forget that I have said repeatedly that the only fair measure of a manager is overall team performance measured almost solely by wins and losses. You win, you stay. You lose, goodbye. Farrell got through 2014 and 2015 because of that totally unexpected WS win in his first year 2013--the one that followed Francona's 2011 disastrous September and Valentine's even worse 2012. He lasted through 2016 because the Sox won the AL East.

 

Also don't forget that Francona got those two WS with two really good bats--Manny and Big Papi--some other good hitters and just enough good pitching. He does get special credit for being in charge for that mind-bogglingly great ALCS in 2004 when the Sox came back from losing the the first three games to the Yankees. Nevertheless, he was gone after the 2011 September collapse.

 

You like fundamentals? Try those--wins and losses and getting to the postseason.

Edited September 9, 2017 by Maxbialystock

[a700hitter]

Really? Yankees fans whose team pays a king's ransom for players are mad at the manager for not winning more WS (the Yankees have won 27 overall)? Astounding. Maybe they're spoiled rotten, just as we might be becoming now that the 86 year drought has been semi-eradicated by not one but three WS titles. Or maybe they should be blaming the guy (Cashman) who has basically spent that king's ransom.

 

In any case, try building the case against Girardi the same way you have built the case against Farrell. Show me the weak fundamentals, the endless mental blunders, the pervasive boneheadedness. Show me all those lousy pitching decisions. You know, all that bad stuff that makes Farrell so worthless.

 

And, while you are at it, don't forget that I have said repeatedly that the only fair measure of a manager is overall team performance measured almost solely by wins and losses. You win, you stay. You lose, goodbye. Farrell got through 2014 and 2015 because of that totally unexpected WS win in his first year 2013--the one that followed Francona's 2011 disastrous September and Valentine's even worse 2012. He lasted through 2016 because the Sox won the AL East.

 

You like fundamentals? Try those--wins and losses and getting to the postseason.

I could probably do a good job of it, because I watch a lot of Yankee telecasts and I live among Yankee fans who disparage him all the time. One guy called talk radio and said that he has lived all over the world and watched baseball in japan, Korea etc and he concluded that Girardi was not just the worst manager in the AL and MLB, but in the world. It was a very entertaining call. I have no interest in comparing 2 overpaid knuckleheads who do their job poorly. If you want to hear the case against Girardi, stream WFAN talk radio and listen for a week.

[Maxbialystock]

Where did you get this idea? I live here and have never heard the idea that Farrell delayed Dever's promotion to the bigs. And how do you know that one is so good at developing young talent and the other sucks? Again, I have never heard that before. Just seems to be your opinion ( which is fine ) as opposed to verifiable fact.

 

I was being facetious to make a point. I think Farrell has done well with Devers, but do remember a lot of complaints recently when he sat him for two straight games. I am almost certain he was not the decider on when Devers would get to Boston. He might have had input. In any case, I thought the right decision was made. On talksox, however, there was much talk about the unnecessary delay caused by stupidly making Devers go through Pawtucket, however short the stay.

 

I don't know whether Giradi has been good for Sanchez and Judge but both have been good and both are young.

 

But I do know Farrell gets zero credit for anything good JBJ, Betts, Bogaerts, Beni, Devers, or Vazquez does--at least, no credit on talksox. He does, however, regularly get credit for any mistakes they make because of course he knows nothing about and just doesn't care about those crucial "fundamentals."

Edited September 9, 2017 by Maxbialystock

[Maxbialystock]

I could probably do a good job of it, because I watch a lot of Yankee telecasts and I live among Yankee fans who disparage him all the time. One guy called talk radio and said that he has lived all over the world and watched baseball in japan, Korea etc and he concluded that Girardi was not just the worst manager in the AL and MLB, but in the world. It was a very entertaining call. I have no interest in comparing 2 overpaid knuckleheads who do their job poorly. If you want to hear the case against Girardi, stream WFAN talk radio and listen for a week.

 

If you want to make the case against Farrell, try my fundamentals--wins, losses, and getting to the postseason. One guy calling talk radio? And you give him an entire sentence andmake him your key evidence to say "2 overpaid knuckleheads who do their job poorly?" Seriously?

[moonslav59]

I was being facetious to make a point. I think Farrell has done well with Devers, but do remember a lot of complaints recently when he sat him for two straight games. I am almost certain he was not the decider on when Devers would get to Boston. He might have had input. In any case, I thought the right decision was made. On talksox, however, there was much talk about the unnecessary delay caused by stupidly making Devers go through Pawtucket, however short the stay.

 

I don't know whether Giradi has been good for Sanchez and Judge but both have been good and both are young.

 

But I do know Farrell gets zero credit for anything good JBJ, Betts, Bogaerts, Beni, Devers, or Vazquez does--at least, no credit on talksox. He does, however, regularly get credit for any mistakes they make because of course he knows nothing about and just doesn't care about those crucial "fundamentals."

 

Yes, let's give credit to JF for what Beni, Betts and Bogey have done this year.

 

(Note: all have done worse than last year at ages normally seeing improvement.)

[Maxbialystock]

Where did you get this idea? I live here and have never heard the idea that Farrell delayed Dever's promotion to the bigs. And how do you know that one is so good at developing young talent and the other sucks? Again, I have never heard that before. Just seems to be your opinion ( which is fine ) as opposed to verifiable fact.

 

A repeat. Disregard.

Edited September 9, 2017 by Maxbialystock

[Maxbialystock]

moonslav, no quarrel on that. How about last year and the year before when those three/two weren't half bad?

 

Besides, you know my basic measurement for managers which I just repeated--wins, losses, and getting to the postseason. Them's my fundamentals.

[SoxHop]

I think Farrell has managed the catching tandem very well this year.

 

I also think he has done well with the use of the bullpen and pulling starters. The complaints in this department is usually full tilt each season, this year it has been minimal.

 

I have very few compaints about who he has started and have used. He's tested struggling players (Holt and Young), and then went elsewhere when he could adding them in once in a while to see if they got their stuff back.

 

I like how he juggled the hitting lineup. I think he saw people struggling, and adjusted well to give them a different look.

 

The boneheaded play stuff has been off the charts bad.

 

Other than the Price incident which I don't think he handled well, I think he has handled the press well.

 

He has seemed to get good use of the quickness of the squad. I like the agressive baserunning. I don't think he has managed a squad with this speed. I beleive he has done well.

 

I like the win-loss column. He has had to deal with some players struggling for lengths of time this year.

 

Soxhop gives Farrell............. a solid B- score for performance this year.

[notin]

Unless the Sox collapse and miss the post-season, I'd be surprised if Farell isn't managing this team in April, 2018.

 

I make no such guarantee for May, 2018..

[a700hitter]

If you want to make the case against Farrell, try my fundamentals--wins, losses, and getting to the postseason. One guy calling talk radio? And you give him an entire sentence andmake him your key evidence to say "2 overpaid knuckleheads who do their job poorly?" Seriously?

Max, I come here to discuss sports, share ideas and have a good time doing it. I am not here to make cases backed with evidence. The story about the guy on the radio wasn't intended as evidence of anything. It was just a funny call I heard and I thought it demonstrated how every manager takes heat from the fan base and the media.

 

I made a very good living making arguments backed by evidence for over 30 years. I have no interest in making my enjoyment of baseball into a debate contest with other fans about topics that don't interest me like comparing managers, because I am not getting paid to do so. I am certain that if someone wanted to employ me to do so, I would leave you and your arguments in tatters and you would be looking for a safe space to go sob. LOL!!

 

I think you might be buying underwear that is 2 sizes too small, because you are just so cranky and combative. I have noooo interest in comparing these 2 dugout buffoons, never mind making a case backed with evidence. I am not trying to convince anyone else of my opinions. In this case, I think both managers are dopes, and frankly, I don't care if you think Farrell or Girardi would have been NASA scientists had it not been for choosing a baseball career. Do yo argue with yourself in front of your mirror? You are arguing with yourself on this topic.

[moonslav59]

moonslav, no quarrel on that. How about last year and the year before when those three/two weren't half bad?

 

Besides, you know my basic measurement for managers which I just repeated--wins, losses, and getting to the postseason. Them's my fundamentals.

 

Bogey's gotten worse and worse on defense over the years. I'm not sure a manager could do anything about that, and maybe JF has tried. I'm not really holding JF responsible for 9 out 10 of our returning players doing worse or much worse than last year, but I suppose he might be partially to blame.

 

To me, wins and losses do matter when evaluating a manager's skill, but it's not the only thing. I do think JF has, and I've given him credit for this, gotten the most out of the pen anyone could expect. I have no issues with how he handles the rotation or the staff as a whole. I rarely criticize his in-game decisions like many do, but to me, JF's ture value is that he's a great pitching coach trying to manage a whole team.

 

He has not gotten the most out of his everyday players, he has not stressed the fundamentals of defense and base running- maybe because he doesn't even know them himself. After all, he barely knows the actual rules of the game. Yes, we lost Papi, but he was never known for defense or base running skills, yet we got worse in many areas of defense and running fundamentals after Papi left.

 

I'm fine, if you don't think those negative aspects of JF's portfolio isn't enough to want him gone, but to me, you seem to not even think those issues exist, and if they do, it's not JF's fault in any way, because we are in first place.

 

Just for argument's sake, do you think it's possible that a manager can turn a 95 to 100 win team into a 90 win team? If yes, do you think that manager should be brought back year after year just because the team keeps winning despite his negative influence?

 

I realize it's hard to quantify "negative influence" and what the net value is for a manager other than wins and losses, but that doesn't mean he can't have a negative influence despite the team winning and winning- not that the Sox have been doing that every year under JF's watch.

 

[moonslav59]

I like the win-loss column. He has had to deal with some players struggling for lengths of time this year.

 

I do think that when looking at the sheer magnitude of the declines in performance from last year, our win-loss record is good. The acquisition of Sale and fine pitching by Pom, of course, has a lot to do with it. That being said, isn't all those declines a mark against JF? Couldn't one claim he has failed to get the most out of his everyday players?

 

The lack of fundamentals is one thing managers are usually held responsible for- right or wrong.

 

I like what you wrote, but I do think Jf was a little slow adjusting the line-ups, but at least he eventually did. Although this is just one example, it it might not have made much of a difference anyways, to me, starting Holt in the one or two batting slots 8 times this year was sheer insanity. Many were after he had shown he was a sub .600 or even .500 hitter this year.

[moonslav59]

Unless the Sox collapse and miss the post-season, I'd be surprised if Farell isn't managing this team in April, 2018.

 

I make no such guarantee for May, 2018..

 

As much as I hate to agree, I do.

[Maxbialystock]

Max, I come here to discuss sports, share ideas and have a good time doing it. I am not here to make cases backed with evidence. The story about the guy on the radio wasn't intended as evidence of anything. It was just a funny call I heard and I thought it demonstrated how every manager takes heat from the fan base and the media.

 

I made a very good living making arguments backed by evidence for over 30 years. I have no interest in making my enjoyment of baseball into a debate contest with other fans about topics that don't interest me like comparing managers, because I am not getting paid to do so. I am certain that if someone wanted to employ me to do so, I would leave you and your arguments in tatters and you would be looking for a safe space to go sob. LOL!!

 

I think you might be buying underwear that is 2 sizes too small, because you are just so cranky and combative. I have noooo interest in comparing these 2 dugout buffoons, never mind making a case backed with evidence. I am not trying to convince anyone else of my opinions. In this case, I think both managers are dopes, and frankly, I don't care if you think Farrell or Girardi would have been NASA scientists had it not been for choosing a baseball career. Do yo argue with yourself in front of your mirror? You are arguing with yourself on this topic.

 

In that case, I'm wrong and I mean it. I do indeed like debating, especially on a Saturday morning. And I suspect, based on those 30 years, you would demolish me if you wanted to. My one small rejoinder is that that lengthy first post was directed at no one in particular. It was meat on the table. And you, not me, decided to take a nibble. I did, however, use that as an excuse to expatiate further and at some length. A misread by me.

Edited September 9, 2017 by Maxbialystock

[Emp9]

I like how he juggled the hitting lineup. I think he saw people struggling, and adjusted well to give them a different look.

 

 

Soxhop gives Farrell............. a solid B- score for performance this year.

 

 

Farrell was MONTHS behind on all of that. For the players and for the offense's production on the whole. No way does he get ANY credit from me when he waited over 2/3rds of the season to make that change.

[Maxbialystock]

Farrell was MONTHS behind on all of that. For the players and for the offense's production on the whole. No way does he get ANY credit from me when he waited over 2/3rds of the season to make that change.

 

Meh. Last year Betts, one example, prospered batting first: OPS .897, first in runs scored with 122, 2d after Ortiz in rbi's with 113 which was more than HanRam's 111 with a great OPS of .866. Besides, the Sox collective OPS's this year were better before the ASG than after.

 

More and more I'm thinking there is an elusive (meaning I am clueless) psychological dimension to slotting hitters. Small sample size, but Devers has been incredible batting 7th with an OPS of 1.414. He batted there last night and the night before when he got out of that nasty little slump. My conclusion? I find it hard to second guess any lineup or even the idea of keeping the same one or changing them regularly. I simply cannot buy the notion that anything Farrell has done with the lineup is very good or very bad. Last year's lineup didn't need a lot of tinkering because Ortiz was so incredible and helped make everyone else better. He's gone and with him a bigger chunk of our run scoring that I thought possible.

Edited September 9, 2017 by Maxbialystock

[S5Dewey]

As much as I hate to agree, I do.

 

I'd be surprised if he breaks training camp (if there's any training camp left after the hurricane!) as the manager and then gets fired in the first month. If he's there in April it means that the FO has some faith in him and a one month sample size probably won't be reason for them to change their minds. June or July, maybe. :-)

[Emp9]

Meh. Last year Betts, one example, prospered batting first: OPS .897, first in runs scored with 122, 2d after Ortiz in rbi's with 113 which was more than HanRam's 111 with a great OPS of .866. Besides, the Sox collective OPS's this year were better before the ASG than after.

 

More and more I'm thinking there is an elusive (meaning I am clueless) psychological dimension to slotting hitters. Small sample size, but Devers has been incredible batting 7th with an OPS of 1.414. He batted there last night and the night before when he got out of that nasty little slump. My conclusion? I find it hard to second guess any lineup or even the idea of keeping the same one or changing them regularly. I simply cannot buy the notion that anything Farrell has done with the lineup is very good or very bad. Last year's lineup didn't need a lot of tinkering because Ortiz was so incredible and helped make everyone else better. He's gone and with him a bigger chunk of our run scoring that I thought possible.

 

Right, last year we had Ortiz in our lineup. That's part of my argument of why Farrell needed to re-think the batting order way faster than he did.

[a700hitter]

In that case, I'm wrong and I mean it. I do indeed like debating, especially on a Saturday morning. And I suspect, based on those 30 years, you would demolish me if you wanted to. My one small rejoinder is that that lengthy first post was directed at no one in particular. It was meat on the table. And you, not me, decided to take a nibble. I did, however, use that as an excuse to expatiate further and at some length. A misread by me.

No problem. You are just more intense than I am about these things. Just don't expect me to match it. I am really not interested in changing minds to adopt my opinions, and people are not likely to change my opinions. And everyone's opinion has validity unless they just don't understand baseball. I don't think there is no one here like that. The quest by some to "invalidate" the opinions of others is obnoxious to me.

[Spudboy]

No problem. You are just more intense than I am about these things. Just don't expect me to match it. I am really not interested in changing minds to adopt my opinions, and people are not likely to change my opinions. And everyone's opinion has validity unless they just don't understand baseball. I don't think there is no one here like that. The quest by some to "invalidate" the opinions of others is obnoxious to me.

 

That's right. This is an opinion board. Not a high school debate.

 

No one here knows anywhere near everything about baseball. Although I do come very close!

 

It is very irritating when someone proclaims this and that and insists that what they say is fact. Acting this way is in my mind extreme douche bagery. Insisting that someone else is wrong because you have no ability to see that you may be wrong is just f***ed for any adult.

[Maxbialystock]

That's right. This is an opinion board. Not a high school debate.

 

No one here knows anywhere near everything about baseball. Although I do come very close!

 

It is very irritating when someone proclaims this and that and insists that what they say is fact. Acting this way is in my mind extreme douche bagery. Insisting that someone else is wrong because you have no ability to see that you may be wrong is just f***ed for any adult.

 

I am longwinded, no question. But in my mind I lay out numbers as such as my case for support. I have, I think, made it clear that I think those "fundamentals," while they are real, are not in my judgment the cause or our problems this year, especially not when we are closing in on the AL East and 90 or more wins and the 3d best record in the AL despite weak hitting. Maybe I have overstepped on that topic, but lately I've noticed others saying just maybe Farrell isn't quite as bad as the talksox consensus (thus I am clearly in the minority) says he is.

 

If you look at some of my other posts, I have ranted about him too--see especially his decision to leave Porcello in in his last start. I also hate that some of our pitchers are still slow to cover 1b on grounders to the right.

 

Overall, however, you have a point. Lots of my stuff is both longwinded and pointed. Kimmi is far more gracious and accommodating.

[moonslav59]

I'd be surprised if he breaks training camp (if there's any training camp left after the hurricane!) as the manager and then gets fired in the first month. If he's there in April it means that the FO has some faith in him and a one month sample size probably won't be reason for them to change their minds. June or July, maybe. :-)

 

Yeah, maybe the end of May is more likely.

 

Had we not won 6 in a row and 9 out of 10 in July this year, he might have been axed already.

[Spudboy]

I am longwinded, no question. But in my mind I lay out numbers as such as my case for support. I have, I think, made it clear that I think those "fundamentals," while they are real, are not in my judgment the cause or our problems this year, especially not when we are closing in on the AL East and 90 or more wins and the 3d best record in the AL despite weak hitting. Maybe I have overstepped on that topic, but lately I've noticed others saying just maybe Farrell isn't quite as bad as the talksox consensus (thus I am clearly in the minority) says he is.

 

If you look at some of my other posts, I have ranted about him too--see especially his decision to leave Porcello in in his last start. I also hate that some of our pitchers are still slow to cover 1b on grounders to the right.

 

Overall, however, you have a point. Lots of my stuff is both longwinded and pointed. Kimmi is far more gracious and accommodating.

 

I was not pointing a finger at you Max.

[Kimmi]

I really don't have a problem with any of Farrell's in game managing decisions, including his line ups. That's not to say that I agree with everything that he does, but IMO, he is really no worse (or no better) than most of the other managers in the game.

 

I do agree that there is just cause to criticize or at least question Farrell for the seemingly lack of fundamentals, blunders, underperformances, etc.

[moonslav59]

I really don't have a problem with any of Farrell's in game managing decisions, including his line ups. That's not to say that I agree with everything that he does, but IMO, he is really no worse (or no better) than most of the other managers in the game.

 

I do agree that there is just cause to criticize or at least question Farrell for the seemingly lack of fundamentals, blunders, underperformances, etc.

 

I might disagree more on line-up choices and sticking with favorites more than he should, but I pretty much agree.

 

Do you think JF and his coaches should shoulder some portion of the blame for 9 of out 10 returning players declining in offense- some by a lot?

[a700hitter]

I really don't have a problem with any of Farrell's in game managing decisions, including his line ups. That's not to say that I agree with everything that he does, but IMO, he is really no worse (or no better) than most of the other managers in the game.

 

I do agree that there is just cause to criticize or at least question Farrell for the seemingly lack of fundamentals, blunders, underperformances, etc.

Not to be argumentative, but I thought lineups didn't matter at all to you because statistically they don't matter.

[Bellhorn04]

I think Farrell has managed the catching tandem very well this year.

 

I also think he has done well with the use of the bullpen and pulling starters. The complaints in this department is usually full tilt each season, this year it has been minimal.

 

I have very few compaints about who he has started and have used. He's tested struggling players (Holt and Young), and then went elsewhere when he could adding them in once in a while to see if they got their stuff back.

 

I like how he juggled the hitting lineup. I think he saw people struggling, and adjusted well to give them a different look.

 

The boneheaded play stuff has been off the charts bad.

 

Other than the Price incident which I don't think he handled well, I think he has handled the press well.

 

He has seemed to get good use of the quickness of the squad. I like the agressive baserunning. I don't think he has managed a squad with this speed. I beleive he has done well.

 

I like the win-loss column. He has had to deal with some players struggling for lengths of time this year.

 

Soxhop gives Farrell............. a solid B- score for performance this year.

 

Very reasonable assessment.

[Bellhorn04]

I really don't have a problem with any of Farrell's in game managing decisions, including his line ups. That's not to say that I agree with everything that he does, but IMO, he is really no worse (or no better) than most of the other managers in the game.

 

I do agree that there is just cause to criticize or at least question Farrell for the seemingly lack of fundamentals, blunders, underperformances, etc.

 

Also very reasonable.