Farrell

[Bellhorn04]

It is all part and parcel of Farrel's aggressive base running philosophy which he accepts as the price you pay to get a net positive result.

 

Benintendi making an ill-advised throw has nothing to do with base running philosophy.

[a700hitter]

Farrell defends and espouses aggressive base running despite the occasional goof up it may cause because he sees the net result as positive. I don't agree with this philosophy. But it will always occur as long as Farrell is manager.

But you do endorse it by demanding examples of how stupidity and poor fundamentals have cost the team runs. That is saying to me that poor fundamentals are okay as long as it doesn't cost runs.

[S5Dewey]

Huh?? We're talking about two different things here. There's a difference between aggressive plays and poor fundamentals a/k/a boneheaded plays. An aggressive play is making an outfielder throw you out at 2B if their momentum is carrying them away from the play It's poor fundamentals if the play is carrying them toward 2B.

It's aggressive (and almost expected) to advance from 2B to 3B on a ball hit behind the runner but it's poor fundamentals if that ball is hit in front of them.

 

It's usually poor fundamentals to throw the ball from the outfield to the plate and allow a runner to advance from 1st to 2nd but we've seen it happen this year.

 

These are things players have learned when they were in high school, but for some reason they seem to have forgotten them in Boston.

 

I have no problem with aggressive baseball if a team has the personnel for it - which the Sox had this year. I even understand that sometimes aggressive baseball will bit you on the ass occasionally. I'm good with that. What I'm not good with is poor fundamentals.

 

If we're going to believe that the end justifies the means then and it's all about winning the division then we should have no problem with anything John Farrel has done this year because... the Sox won the division. So does the entire team get a pass on sloppy baseball? I just believe that sloppy baseball leads to more sloppy baseball and good baseball leads to more good baseball.

 

IMO they only good thing to come out of this is that sloppy baseball hasn't cost this team a playoff win - a possibility we've already discussed - thus far.

[a700hitter]

Huh?? We're talking about two different things here. There's a difference between aggressive plays and poor fundamentals a/k/a boneheaded plays. An aggressive play is making an outfielder throw you out at 2B if their momentum is carrying them away from the play It's poor fundamentals if the play is carrying them toward 2B.

It's aggressive (and almost expected) to advance from 2B to 3B on a ball hit behind the runner but it's poor fundamentals if that ball is hit in front of them.

 

It's usually poor fundamentals to throw the ball from the outfield to the plate and allow a runner to advance from 1st to 2nd but we've seen it happen this year.

 

These are things players have learned when they were in high school, but for some reason they seem to have forgotten them in Boston.

 

I have no problem with aggressive baseball if a team has the personnel for it - which the Sox had this year. I even understand that sometimes aggressive baseball will bit you on the ass occasionally. I'm good with that. What I'm not good with is poor fundamentals.

 

If we're going to believe that the end justifies the means then and it's all about winning the division then we should have no problem with anything John Farrel has done this year because... the Sox won the division. So does the entire team get a pass on sloppy baseball? I just believe that sloppy baseball leads to more sloppy baseball and good baseball leads to more good baseball.

 

IMO they only good thing to come out of this is that sloppy baseball hasn't cost this team a playoff win - a possibility we've already discussed - thus far.

There is no justification or rationalization for poor fundamentals, and especially not for the repetitive failure of fundamentals.

[veryoldtimer]

Ah, now I understand!

It's aggressive base running when the other team has to make a play to get you out, and doesn't.

And, it's boneheaded base running when they do make the play.

Simple

[a700hitter]

Ah, now I understand!

It's aggressive base running when the other team has to make a play to get you out, and doesn't.

And, it's boneheaded base running when they do make the play.

Simple

That is a very mistaken understanding.

[S5Dewey]

Ah, now I understand!

It's aggressive base running when the other team has to make a play to get you out, and doesn't.

And, it's boneheaded base running when they do make the play.

Simple

 

Not at all. It's aggressive baserunning when a defensive player has to make an outstanding play to get you out - and that happens sometimes. These guys are Major Leaguers after all.

It's a boneheaded play when you can be gotten out by a defensive player making an average play.

[a700hitter]

Not at all. It's aggressive baserunning when a defensive player has to make an outstanding play to get you out - and that happens sometimes. These guys are Major Leaguers after all.

It's a boneheaded play when you can be gotten out by a defensive player making an average play.

Or by risking an out when a productive out by 1 of the next 2 batters would score you.

[moonslav59]

Then why bother doing it?

 

As Bill Parcells said "If they want you to win then at least they should let you do the shopping" or something close to that.

 

The Sox need to do some shopping for some new meat.

 

Seriously?

 

Only the most pressing issue needs to be dealt with.

 

Just one per winter is the limit?

[Spudboy]

Seriously?

 

Only the most pressing issue needs to be dealt with.

 

Just one per winter is the limit?

 

What?

[moonslav59]

You never presented evidence for #2. I know we already went through this before. If there were massive amounts of boneheaded plays it doesn't mean it reflects only on management. It also means it should be easy to list at least 10 examples of this since the amount was massive. Without pinpointing what type of boneheaded plays there were and which players committed them it is impossible to say if was just a few bad apples or a team wide problem.

 

I never kept track. I wish I did. I haven't saved every game on tape, and even if I did, I'm not going back to make a list. My OCD only brings me so far.

 

If you want to believe we did not have way more boneheaded mistakes than years past, then so be it.

 

I've beaten this horse to nine deaths. I firmly believe my position. You do yours. Time to move on.

 

[moonslav59]

So if bad fundamentals don't cost runs, it is okay and acceptable. That is ass backwards.

 

Exactly!

 

Or, if it did not affect our two playoff losses, then the problem does not need to be addressed.

 

Bass akwards!

[moonslav59]

What?

 

My point was obvious.

[Bellhorn04]

My point was obvious.

 

It was a rather confusing exchange.

 

Spudboy said replacing Farrell was not our most pressing need.

You agreed with that.

Then Spud said 'So why bother doing it?'

Then you kind of jumped on him.

[Northern Star]

Scott Lauber just mentioned the name Tony LaRussa. Oh God, I'd rather have Farrell.

[Kimmi]

Ah, now I understand!

It's aggressive base running when the other team has to make a play to get you out, and doesn't.

And, it's boneheaded base running when they do make the play.

Simple

 

Haha. This is not always the case, but I do agree that a lot of what is called 'boneheaded' was just and aggressive play that didn't work.

[moonslav59]

It was a rather confusing exchange.

 

Spudboy said replacing Farrell was not our most pressing need.

You agreed with that.

Then Spud said 'So why bother doing it?'

Then you kind of jumped on him.

 

My point was obvious.

 

A team can do more than just it's most pressing need.

 

We can deal with 2, 3 or even 4 of our most pressing needs in one winter.

 

Just because I do not think JF is our weakest link, does not mean he should not be replaced.

 

(BTW, I would not say this is "jumping on him":

 

"Seriously?

 

Only the most pressing issue needs to be dealt with.

 

Just one per winter is the limit?")

[Northern Star]

Haha. This is not always the case, but I do agree that a lot of what is called 'boneheaded' was just and aggressive play that didn't work.

 

Baseball is perhaps the biggest sport for this. It works, genius, it doesn't work, boneheaded.

[Spudboy]

Somebody always has to have a bigger dick.

 

In my own defense I have never worried about such things and there certainly is never any ambiguity in what I say.

[moonslav59]

Haha. This is not always the case, but I do agree that a lot of what is called 'boneheaded' was just and aggressive play that didn't work.

 

Again, I disagree.

 

Forgetting how many outs there are is not overaggressiveness.

 

Running to 3B with the play hit in front of you is boneheaded. Just because the guy has a 5% chance of making it, does not make it an justifiable aggressive play. It's a blunder- plain and simple. Being thrown out at home by 30 feet is a blunder by the 3B coach or the runner. Not looking at the runner ahead of you, who has stopped, as you run into an occupied base does show aggressiveness, but it is boneheaded nonetheless.

 

These are just the base running blunders. The fielding ones are more numerous and rarely involved over aggressiveness.

 

I love aggressive running. I'm happy we adopted that philosophy. The aggressive running helped more than it hurt. The boneheadness did not and actually prevented us from having an excellent base running ranking and score.

[moonslav59]

Baseball is perhaps the biggest sport for this. It works, genius, it doesn't work, boneheaded.

 

How often does running from 2B to 3B work when the ball is hit to the SS or 3Bman (assuming no shift has put the 3Bman out of position)?

 

I can never call that aggressive, even though I suppose the intention might have been so.

 

It's blunder. Even little leaguers know that.

[Kimmi]

Again, I disagree.

 

Forgetting how many outs there are is not overaggressiveness.

 

Running to 3B with the play hit in front of you is boneheaded. Just because the guy has a 5% chance of making it, does not make it an justifiable aggressive play. It's a blunder- plain and simple. Being thrown out at home by 30 feet is a blunder by the 3B coach or the runner. Not looking at the runner ahead of you, who has stopped, as you run into an occupied base does show aggressiveness, but it is boneheaded nonetheless.

 

These are just the base running blunders. The fielding ones are more numerous and rarely involved over aggressiveness.

 

I love aggressive running. I'm happy we adopted that philosophy. The aggressive running helped more than it hurt. The boneheadness did not and actually prevented us from having an excellent base running ranking and score.

 

I have already agreed with you that there have indeed been boneheaded plays. I just don't think there have been as many as you and some others claim. I'm not talking about the obvious boneheaded plays, like forgetting how many outs there are.

 

IMO, aggressive base running is often a judgment call. If it works, the runner made a great baserunning play. If it doesn't, the runner is stupid.

[Kimmi]

How often does running from 2B to 3B work when the ball is hit to the SS or 3Bman (assuming no shift has put the 3Bman out of position)?

 

I can never call that aggressive, even though I suppose the intention might have been so.

 

It's blunder. Even little leaguers know that.

 

I have seen many runners do this. Mookie does it, and he is considered a very smart baserunner.

[devildavid]

john-farrell-defends-andrew-benintendis-aggressive-baserunning

 

https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/redsox/2017/08/13/snotes/oWVxYg0IN7nSBGE8fqiPYN/story.html

[Spudboy]

Did he defend Beni's sloppy play of caroms off walls and erratic arm?

[devildavid]

But you do endorse it by demanding examples of how stupidity and poor fundamentals have cost the team runs. That is saying to me that poor fundamentals are okay as long as it doesn't cost runs.

 

Nope. I'm against the aggressive base running philosophy. I question that massive amounts of boneheaded plays occurred. And if the evidence is presented for massive amounts of boneheaded plays being made it must also then be demonstrated how many wins it cost the team.

[devildavid]

Huh?? We're talking about two different things here. There's a difference between aggressive plays and poor fundamentals a/k/a boneheaded plays. An aggressive play is making an outfielder throw you out at 2B if their momentum is carrying them away from the play It's poor fundamentals if the play is carrying them toward 2B.

It's aggressive (and almost expected) to advance from 2B to 3B on a ball hit behind the runner but it's poor fundamentals if that ball is hit in front of them.

 

It's usually poor fundamentals to throw the ball from the outfield to the plate and allow a runner to advance from 1st to 2nd but we've seen it happen this year.

 

These are things players have learned when they were in high school, but for some reason they seem to have forgotten them in Boston.

 

I have no problem with aggressive baseball if a team has the personnel for it - which the Sox had this year. I even understand that sometimes aggressive baseball will bit you on the ass occasionally. I'm good with that. What I'm not good with is poor fundamentals.

 

If we're going to believe that the end justifies the means then and it's all about winning the division then we should have no problem with anything John Farrel has done this year because... the Sox won the division. So does the entire team get a pass on sloppy baseball? I just believe that sloppy baseball leads to more sloppy baseball and good baseball leads to more good baseball.

 

IMO they only good thing to come out of this is that sloppy baseball hasn't cost this team a playoff win - a possibility we've already discussed - thus far.

 

So if sloppy baseball can win the division why do fundamentals matter? Baseball must be a very random sport.

[devildavid]

Did he defend Beni's sloppy play of caroms off walls and erratic arm?

 

No. Is Beni an overall negative on defense?

[moonslav59]

No. Is Beni an overall negative on defense?

 

Out of 29 LF'ers with 450+ innings in LF, Beni placed 15th in UZR/150 at +1.3.

 

+1.3 RngR

-0.8 ErrR

+0.9 UZR

 

He's 18th in UZR at -4.6.

 

He's 6th in DRS at +9.

 

Looks pretty close to average, despite all the gaffs.

 

[moonslav59]

I have seen many runners do this. Mookie does it, and he is considered a very smart baserunner.

 

The only time I saw Betts do it was when he had a big lead and the ball was hit very slowly to the SS.

 

Getting thrown out at 3B by 4 or more feet is bonehead, especially with 0 or 2 outs.