Best manager in Red Sox history

[dgalehouse]

Having a " ring " is a terrible way to judge a baseball player. No matter how good a pitcher may be , they need to depend on others. No matter how good a hitter may be , they have to bat in order, and can be pitched around as needed. The number of rings is probably more relevant in basketball, where one or two players can dominate. As for managers , their reputation lives and dies with the performance of the players. Grady Little would be much more highly regarded if Pedro had gotten a couple of more outs. What would Tito's legacy be if Dave Roberts got picked off ? ( It almost happened. ) Casey Stengel didn't exactly come across as a genius, but he was provided with many of the best players in the game. Alex Cora is off to a great start. Time will tell. Edited October 22, 2018 by dgalehouse

[moonslav59]

He has done a terrific job managing the team. Tactically he is pretty good. What is weird is comparing him tactically to Francona when there isn't a ton of evidence of anything different. Neither guy sacrificed much. Francona ran when he had players who could run. Both guys handle pitching staffs well. The differences in defensive positioning are typical for the two different time frames in which they managed.

 

Cora has shown certain strengths in a year. Francona did that and then kept the team in good shape while the key players changed. Francona was outstanding with young players, and Cora has certainly shown some goods there. (though his young players had more certainty - 2006 Dustin Pedroia sure did not look like a big league player) Francona will always have 2011 held over him - and he deserves some of the blame sure. But 2010 was one of his best managing jobs. And of course Cleveland has been excellent throughout.

 

Cora inherited one of the worst running teams I've seen in years. We added JD, who is not known for running. Last year, we not only made a ton of base running errors, but we made a lot on defense as well. Cora greatly improved on that. He also added analytics in ways no Sox manager has ever done. True, the times are different than when Tito was manager, but Cora has done it.

 

Tito inherited a team that should have won in 2003.

 

I'm not bad mouthing Tito. He was awesome. Favoritism of vets has always been an issue with Sox managers and most MLB managers as well. Cora isn't that much different, I admit, except for maybe the HRam recommendation.

 

Again, Tito was a great manager with us. He had a couple blips here and there, and I get how Cora has not managed long enough to have any, but that shouldn't be held against him.

 

I'm not sure what was so great about 2010. True, Beckett only started 21 games, but Buch gave us 28 starts (2.33 ERA) and we still had Lester, Lackey, Wake, Dice-K and Doubront. Papelbon had an off year, which I don't blame Tito for, but Bard was great. The rest of the pen, which looks better than this year's on paper, all had ERAs over 4.40.

 

While we had no Manny or Jay Bay to "protect" Papi, we still had this...

 

Beltre .919 (28 HRs)

Youk .975 (19 HRs)

VMart .844 (20 HRs)

Pedey .860

Nava with a .351 OBP JD Drew at .793 and 22 HRs

Bill Hall even hit 18 HRs in just 344 ABs & Lowrie was at .907/

 

We finished in 3rd place with 89 wins.

[sk7326]

Cora inherited one of the worst running teams I've seen in years. We added JD, who is not known for running. Last year, we not only made a ton of base running errors, but we made a lot on defense as well. Cora greatly improved on that. He also added analytics in ways no Sox manager has ever done. True, the times are different than when Tito was manager, but Cora has done it.

 

Tito inherited a team that should have won in 2003.

 

I'm not bad mouthing Tito. He was awesome. Favoritism of vets has always been an issue with Sox managers and most MLB managers as well. Cora isn't that much different, I admit, except for maybe the HRam recommendation.

 

Again, Tito was a great manager with us. He had a couple blips here and there, and I get how Cora has not managed long enough to have any, but that shouldn't be held against him.

 

I'm not sure what was so great about 2010. True, Beckett only started 21 games, but Buch gave us 28 starts (2.33 ERA) and we still had Lester, Lackey, Wake, Dice-K and Doubront. Papelbon had an off year, which I don't blame Tito for, but Bard was great. The rest of the pen, which looks better than this year's on paper, all had ERAs over 4.40.

 

While we had no Manny or Jay Bay to "protect" Papi, we still had this...

 

Beltre .919 (28 HRs)

Youk .975 (19 HRs)

VMart .844 (20 HRs)

Pedey .860

Nava with a .351 OBP JD Drew at .793 and 22 HRs

Bill Hall even hit 18 HRs in just 344 ABs & Lowrie was at .907/

 

We finished in 3rd place with 89 wins.

 

Oh dear

 

75 games of Dustin Pedroia

102 games of Kevin Youkilis

48 games of Mike Cameron

 

Cora took over a team which had won 90+ games the previous 2 seasons. The Red Sox were leading edge analytics the entire time except for whatever the hell Valentine was doing. I mean the GMs would have canned a manager who didn't.

 

I was extremely bullish on Cora - and he has been terrific. At the same time, when a 90-win team led by dudes entering their prime adds one of the league's best power hitters - that they improved is not that revelatory. And when that sort of improved team gets to play Baltimore 19 times a year - the win total can be even better than that. Now I think Cora has done a great job - I think his style is a better fit with young players than Farrell, but on the field I don't see it. (the Red Sox actually are lower ranked in baserunning value than last year)

Edited October 22, 2018 by sk7326

[moonslav59]

Oh dear

 

75 games of Dustin Pedroia

102 games of Kevin Youkilis

48 games of Mike Cameron

 

Cora took over a team which had won 90+ games the previous 2 seasons. The Red Sox were leading edge analytics the entire time except for whatever the hell Valentine was doing. I mean the GMs would have canned a manager who didn't.

 

I was extremely bullish on Cora - and he has been terrific. At the same time, when a 90-win team led by dudes entering their prime adds one of the league's best power hitters - that they improved is not that revelatory. And when that sort of improved team gets to play Baltimore 19 times a year - the win total can be even better than that. Now I think Cora has done a great job - I think his style is a better fit with young players than Farrell, but on the field I don't see it. (the Red Sox actually are lower ranked in baserunning value than last year)

 

The blunders have been greatly reduced.

 

We were not the leaders on analytics the years before Cora took over.

[sk7326]

The blunders have been greatly reduced.

 

We were not the leaders on analytics the years before Cora took over.

 

Theo, Cherington and Hoyer would have been genuinely shocked to realize this. There was the brain drain you'd expect to a degree when Dombrowski took over. But a lot of the folks stayed - and (at least Gammons wrote about this) Dombrowski was not going to tear down the good work which was already done.

[iortiz]

You need at least a ring to quailfy in order to be the best manager. If Cora wins (he will), he will be. Edited October 22, 2018 by iortiz

[moonslav59]

Theo, Cherington and Hoyer would have been genuinely shocked to realize this. There was the brain drain you'd expect to a degree when Dombrowski took over. But a lot of the folks stayed - and (at least Gammons wrote about this) Dombrowski was not going to tear down the good work which was already done.

 

We were pretty late on using the shift, or at least to a high degree.

[Bellhorn04]

Bernie Williams has four rings, Ted Williams has zero. Eli Manning has two rings, Dan Marino has zero.

 

100% right Youk. For some reason I couldn't resist posting that line.

[OH FOY]

Marino went to SB his 1st year, never went back again. 8-10 in the Play-offs. Choker in the big games. Bad example. Edited October 22, 2018 by OH FOY!

[cp176]

Marino went to SB his 1st year, never went back again. 8-10 in the Play-offs. Choker in the big games.

 

NY Giants fan since 1958 and I would take Marino over Manning in any scenario anywhere at anytime.

[sk7326]

We were pretty late on using the shift, or at least to a high degree.

 

I remember it being used a lot in 2013, although definitions matter - and "shifts" as counted by STATS is rather extreme https://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/boston-red-sox-infield-shift-changing-perspectives-042516

Edited October 22, 2018 by sk7326

[BillyWilliams]

To me, Cora is easily top 3 in Sox history, and I voted for him as the best ever.

 

Small sample size......

[moonslav59]

I remember it being used a lot in 2013, although definitions matter - and "shifts" as counted by STATS is rather extreme https://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/boston-red-sox-infield-shift-changing-perspectives-042516

 

Yes, we used it, but not to the extent that it was being used by other teams over the last few year and by us this year.

[notin]

Having a " ring " is a terrible way to judge a baseball player. No matter how good a pitcher may be , they need to depend on others. No matter how good a hitter may be , they have to bat in order, and can be pitched around as needed. The number of rings is probably more relevant in basketball, where one or two players can dominate. As for managers , their reputation lives and dies with the performance of the players. Grady Little would be much more highly regarded if Pedro had gotten a couple of more outs. What would Tito's legacy be if Dave Roberts got picked off ? ( It almost happened. ) Casey Stengel didn't exactly come across as a genius, but he was provided with many of the best players in the game. Alex Cora is off to a great start. Time will tell.

 

The "ring" argument is a stupid and shallow way to judge any athlete.

 

In Chicago,I've asked tons of times why everyone just assumes Jordan is the best basketball player ever, since there are some pretty legitimate arguments for LeBron and Kobe. But all anyone ever says is "Six rings."

 

Then I have to reply "Then why isn't Bill Russell and his eleven rings in 13 seasons considered the best ever?"

[Bellhorn04]

The "ring" argument is a stupid and shallow way to judge any athlete.

 

In Chicago,I've asked tons of times why everyone just assumes Jordan is the best basketball player ever, since there are some pretty legitimate arguments for LeBron and Kobe. But all anyone ever says is "Six rings."

 

Then I have to reply "Then why isn't Bill Russell and his eleven rings in 13 seasons considered the best ever?"

 

Because he was so tall.

[BillyWilliams]

To me, Cora is easily top 3 in Sox history, and I voted for him as the best ever.

 

It's like a Yankee fan proclaiming Luke Voight as one of the top HR hitters in their history.

[cp176]

The "ring" argument is a stupid and shallow way to judge any athlete.

 

In Chicago,I've asked tons of times why everyone just assumes Jordan is the best basketball player ever, since there are some pretty legitimate arguments for LeBron and Kobe. But all anyone ever says is "Six rings."

 

Then I have to reply "Then why isn't Bill Russell and his eleven rings in 13 seasons considered the best ever?"

 

notin - Bill Russell is considered to be the greatest bb player of all time - followed closely by wilt! Depends on which "authority" you ask.

[Slasher9]

Tito for now. If Cora wins this WS and has sustained success, it’ll be a conversation.

 

this where i be

[sk7326]

notin - Bill Russell is considered to be the greatest bb player of all time - followed closely by wilt! Depends on which "authority" you ask.

 

He is certainly one of 3 or 4 reasonable answers

[notin]

notin - Bill Russell is considered to be the greatest bb player of all time - followed closely by wilt! Depends on which "authority" you ask.

 

I can agree with that. 11 rings!!

 

(And maybe another reason or two.)

[notin]

He is certainly one of 3 or 4 reasonable answers

 

Most definitely.

 

Unless you live in Chicago...

[Bellhorn04]

I can agree with that. 11 rings!!

 

(And maybe another reason or two.)

 

Greatest big man!

 

Seriously, you pretty much have to have 2 categories for basketball players.

[moonslav59]

I can agree with that. 11 rings!!

 

(And maybe another reason or two.)

 

Bill also had a college championship and Olympic Gold in the year before he went pro.

 

He was the best.

[Bellhorn04]

bill also had a college championship and olympic gold in the year before he went pro.

 

He was the best big man.

 

ftfy

[dgalehouse]

The "ring" argument is a stupid and shallow way to judge any athlete.

 

In Chicago,I've asked tons of times why everyone just assumes Jordan is the best basketball player ever, since there are some pretty legitimate arguments for LeBron and Kobe. But all anyone ever says is "Six rings."

 

Then I have to reply "Then why isn't Bill Russell and his eleven rings in 13 seasons considered the best ever?"

 

Point is ; Jordan , Russell , LeBron , Kobe as well as Bird and Magic would all be considered among the best of all time. And the rings are a big part of it. But that does not apply so much to baseball , where it is much more difficult for one player to win a championship.

[moonslav59]

ftfy

 

No, I had it right the first time, and I'm not even a Celtics fan.

[sk7326]

Most definitely.

 

Unless you live in Chicago...

 

Realistically LeBron, Jordan, Russell and Kareem are the clear 4 best choices here ... order is up to personal taste

[Bellhorn04]

No, I had it right the first time, and I'm not even a Celtics fan.

 

If you're picking Russell you're definitely relying on the rings argument.

[Bellhorn04]

Realistically LeBron, Jordan, Russell and Kareem are the clear 4 best choices here ... order is up to personal taste

 

Seems like a very reasonable position.

[moonslav59]

If you're picking Russell you're definitely relying on the rings argument.

 

He barely had 2 seasons where he did not win it all.

 

Winning his last year in college at the University of San Francisco was monumental.

 

It's not just about the rings. Julio Lugo has a ring as the starting SS for the Sox. To me, the Celts don't with without Russell. He was a tremendous defensive player. I've played enough basketball in my life to know the great importance or rebounds, and nobody was better than Bill. I'm also convinced he could have and would have scored much more, if needed.

 

I get the Jordan argument. I get the Wilt argument. I even think Magic is under-rated, but to me, and it's just my opinion, Russell in the best ever.