Red Sox (Dobbins) vs Tigers (Skubal): 5/14/25, 6:40pm

[TheSplinteredSplendor]

11 minutes ago, notin said:

but they’re also still winning almost 50% of the time in a game where winning 60% of the time is elite…

60% may certainly be elite, but 50% is still mediocre

[TheSplinteredSplendor]

12 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Fair points, and I've been a big Cora supporter. Maybe some complacency has set in. It's hard to know.

It's not uncommon for a manager/coach to have outlived their time in an organization. Their voice starts to sound like the adults in the Peanuts cartoon to the clubhouse.

Think Pat Riley with the Lakers.

He didn't lose the ability to coach, he was just falling on deaf ears.

[moonslav59]

1 minute ago, TheSplinteredSplendor said:

It's not uncommon for a manager/coach to have outlived their time in an organization. Their voice starts to sound like the adults in the Peanuts cartoon to the clubhouse.

Think Pat Riley with the Lakers.

He didn't lose the ability to coach, he was just falling on deaf ears.

I was a huge Tito fan, but I did feel it was time for him to move on.

I'm not sure I'm there with Cora. Cora has had some real tough rosters to work with since 2019.

I realize 2021 was light years away, but I did think this roster was better than it's showed, so far.

[TheSplinteredSplendor]

1 minute ago, moonslav59 said:

I was a huge Tito fan, but I did feel it was time for him to move on.

I'm not sure I'm there with Cora. Cora has had some real tough rosters to work with since 2019.

I realize 2021 was light years away, but I did think this roster was better than it's showed, so far.

Only time will tell.

To me it looks like he caters to the players' egos too much.

I think they need a Girardi type guy.

[notin]

16 minutes ago, TheSplinteredSplendor said:

60% may certainly be elite, but 50% is still mediocre

And the difference between the two clearly isnt that much.  Kind of the point there…

[Bellhorn04]

27 minutes ago, notin said:

So he can win when given a team most managers could win with?  Not exactly the loftiest praise.

Casas injury aside, could no manager win with this team?

Bad bullpens make bad managers.

If we had a good bullpen we'd have several more wins and no one would be calling for Cora's head. 

[notin]

6 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Bad bullpens make bad managers.

If we had a good bullpen we'd have several more wins and no one would be calling for Cora's head. 

And sometimes the bullpen is just full of bad or struggling pitchers.  But sometimes the manager makes the bullpen less effective.  Right?

[Bellhorn04]

2 minutes ago, notin said:

And sometimes the bullpen is just full of bad or struggling pitchers.  But sometimes the manager makes the bullpen less effective.  Right?

It's possible for the manager to make things worse with his usage, absolutely.  I haven't really seen any evidence Cora is misusing anyone.  We were hoping Whitlock would be 2021 Whitlock.  Instead he's been a big part of the problem lately.

[TheSplinteredSplendor]

16 minutes ago, notin said:

And the difference between the two clearly isnt that much.  Kind of the point there…

Umm, the difference at the end of the season is winning 97 games or 81.

I'd say that's a pretty big difference.

[notin]

18 minutes ago, TheSplinteredSplendor said:

Only time will tell.

To me it looks like he caters to the players' egos too much.

I think they need a Girardi type guy.

Thank you for that perfect segue way.

In 2022, Girardi was the opening day manager for the Phillies.  After 51 games, the Phillies were 22-29 and 12 1/2 games out, for which Girardi was fired.

And as you all know, the Phillies went to the World Series that year.

22-23 is mediocre, but it’s early.  Plenty of time here.  I know someone will respond with “but this is different.  This Sox team looks BAD!”  Well, did the Phillies go 22-29 by looking good?

[notin]

Just now, Bellhorn04 said:

It's possible for the manager to make things worse with his usage, absolutely.  I haven't really seen any evidence Cora is misusing anyone.  We were hoping Whitlock would be 2021 Whitlock.  Instead he's been a big part of the problem lately.

Actually Whitlock looks like a prime candidate for questionable usage.  His first inning is typically effective, but his second is often much less so.  So why does Cora keep giving him second innings?

[notin]

4 minutes ago, TheSplinteredSplendor said:

Umm, the difference at the end of the season is winning 97 games or 81.

I'd say that's a pretty big difference.

It’s 10%.  Thats it.  What other sport has a 10% difference in winning percentage between the best and the median?

[TheSplinteredSplendor]

3 minutes ago, notin said:

Thank you for that perfect segue way.

In 2022, Girardi was the opening day manager for the Phillies.  After 51 games, the Phillies were 22-29 and 12 1/2 games out, for which Girardi was fired.

And as you all know, the Phillies went to the World Series that year.

22-23 is mediocre, but it’s early.  Plenty of time here.  I know someone will respond with “but this is different.  This Sox team looks BAD!”  Well, did the Phillies go 22-29 by looking good?

I said a Girardi type guy, that doesn't mean it has to be Girardi.

Last I checked, he also won a WS and a manager of the year award.

My point was that this team looks  like it needs a "kick in the ass" type manager, not one that is going to coddle the players' egos, IMO.

[Old Red]

6 minutes ago, notin said:

Actually Whitlock looks like a prime candidate for questionable usage.  His first inning is typically effective, but his second is often much less so.  So why does Cora keep giving him second innings?

It took Whitlock 32 pitches to get through his ONLY inning on Tuesday.

[TheSplinteredSplendor]

1 minute ago, notin said:

It’s 10%.  Thats it.  What other sport has a 10% difference in winning percentage between the best and the median?

Umm, .600 is not "the best". Plenty of teams win more than 97 games.

But if you don't think there's a big difference between winning 97 games vs 81, then so be it.

Let me know how many teams make the playoffs with 81 wins.

[harmony]

The Red Sox are a winning streak away from likely postseason contention and a losing streak away from falling out of contention.

https://www.fangraphs.com/standings/playoff-odds

That's baseball.

 

[notin]

1 minute ago, harmony said:

The Red Sox are a winning streak away from likely postseason contention and a losing streak away from falling out of contention.

https://www.fangraphs.com/standings/playoff-odds

That's baseball.

 

Exactly.

And that statement applies to many teams…

[notin]

6 minutes ago, TheSplinteredSplendor said:

Umm, .600 is not "the best". Plenty of teams win more than 97 games.

But if you don't think there's a big difference between winning 97 games vs 81, then so be it.

Let me know how many teams make the playoffs with 81 wins.

Many?

Ladt year it was one team, and they won 98 games.

The year before - 2 teams.

3 did in 2022.  Of course none of them were over by much,  and no one approached 70%.

And MANY teams make the postseason without winning 60% of the time.

Also, we have seen WS champions with as low as 83 wins.  Is that so different than 81?

[Bellhorn04]

19 minutes ago, notin said:

Actually Whitlock looks like a prime candidate for questionable usage.  His first inning is typically effective, but his second is often much less so.  So why does Cora keep giving him second innings?

Do you have some numbers on that?

[TheSplinteredSplendor]

2 minutes ago, notin said:

Many?

Ladt year it was one team, and they won 98 games.

The year before - 2 teams.

3 did in 2022.  Of course none of them were over by much,  and no one approached 70%.

And MANY teams make the postseason without winning 60% of the time.

Also, we have seen WS champions with as low as 83 wins.  Is that so different than 81?

Yes, over the years many teams have won 97+ games.

Not many have made the playoffs with 81 wins.

But, hey, if you want to stick with that then knock yourself out.

[Bellhorn04]

15 minutes ago, TheSplinteredSplendor said:

I said a Girardi type guy, that doesn't mean it has to be Girardi.

Last I checked, he also won a WS and a manager of the year award.

My point was that this team looks  like it needs a "kick in the ass" type manager, not one that is going to coddle the players' egos, IMO.

That's what the Sox thought in 2012 when they brought in Valentine.

Kick in the ass managers seem to be a dying breed - maybe completely dead, actually.

[notin]

15 minutes ago, Old Red said:

It took Whitlock 32 pitches to get through his ONLY inning on Tuesday.

And that was not his first outing.  
 

Whitlock has 4 blown saves in his last 5 outings.  The first two came when he gave up runs in his second inning.  The third was a ghost runner scoring, which I think is more understandable since it’s a dumb rule.  And then his last bad outing. 
 

His durability for pitching 2 innings has been questioned before.  Not every RP can do it multiple times…

[notin]

22 minutes ago, TheSplinteredSplendor said:

I said a Girardi type guy, that doesn't mean it has to be Girardi.

Last I checked, he also won a WS and a manager of the year award.

My point was that this team looks  like it needs a "kick in the ass" type manager, not one that is going to coddle the players' egos, IMO.

I’m just pointing out 22-23 is too early to give up.  Girardi provided the segue way to the perfect recent example…

[Bellhorn04]

12 minutes ago, notin said:

And that was not his first outing.  
 

Whitlock has 4 blown saves in his last 5 outings.  The first two came when he gave up runs in his second inning.  The third was a ghost runner scoring, which I think is more understandable since it’s a dumb rule.  And then his last bad outing. 
 

His durability for pitching 2 innings has been questioned before.  Not every RP can do it multiple times…

It has?  The only other season he had a lot of 2 inning outings was 2021, and he was outstanding. 

His durability as a starter was a different story.

[notin]

26 minutes ago, TheSplinteredSplendor said:

Yes, over the years many teams have won 97+ games.

Not many have made the playoffs with 81 wins.

But, hey, if you want to stick with that then knock yourself out.

Not sure what your point is.  Even the many that have won over 97 games, very few have gone over by much.    Even the rate 106 win team only wins 65% of the time.

My point is that MLB has the tightest range in winning percentage of any sport, and over a long season the difference between the best and an average team isnt so that much.  And, if you like, we can get into the difference between 81 wins and making the postseason.  What’s that take nowadays? We’ve seen 84 wins get in (and go to the World Series).

Your point?  I have no idea…

[notin]

16 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

It has?  The only other season he had a lot of 2 inning outings was 2021, and he was outstanding. 

His durability as a starter was a different story.

The problem is 2021 was a long time ago, and for Whitlock a TJ surgery ago.  He might not be the same pitcher today he was then…

[TheSplinteredSplendor]

26 minutes ago, notin said:

I’m just pointing out 22-23 is too early to give up.  Girardi provided the segue way to the perfect recent example…

No, it doesn't provide the perfect segue as they are 2 entirely different teams in two entirely different scenarios.

I don't know that changing managers is "giving up" though.

[TheSplinteredSplendor]

3 minutes ago, notin said:

Not sure what your point is.  Even the many that have won over 97 games, very few have gone over by much.    Even the rate 106 win team only wins 65% of the time.

My point is that MLB has the tightest range in winning percentage of any sport, and over a long season the difference between the best and an average team isnt so that much.  And, if you like, we can get into the difference between 81 wins and making the postseason.  What’s that take nowadays? We’ve seen 84 wins get in (and go to the World Series).

Your point?  I have no idea…

Nonsense, one could argue it's just as close in the NFL.

A .600 team wins 10 games, a .500 team wins roughly 8.

Many more teams make the NFL playoffs with 10 wins than 8.

My point is that there's a huge difference between 97 wins and 81. If you want to hang your hat on "there isn't" then have at it. That will be a lonely ship to sink on.

[notin]

1 minute ago, TheSplinteredSplendor said:

No, it doesn't provide the perfect segue as they are 2 entirely different teams in two entirely different scenarios.

I don't know that changing managers is "giving up" though.

Right.  The Phillies had a worse record (different team) and were much further back (different scenario).  
 

Changing managers is the antithesis of giving up.  But I’ve been responding to posts saying the Sox should bring up Roman Anthony so he’s acclimated when the Sox are “ready to compete”.  The mention of Girardi reminded me of the 2022 Phillies, who clearly didn’t give up despite being worse than this current Sox team…

[TheSplinteredSplendor]

Just now, notin said:

Right.  The Phillies had a worse record (different team) and were much further back (different scenario).  
 

Changing managers is the antithesis of giving up.  But I’ve been responding to posts saying the Sox should bring up Roman Anthony so he’s acclimated when the Sox are “ready to compete”.  The mention of Girardi reminded me of the 2022 Phillies, who clearly didn’t give up despite being worse than this current Sox team…

Well, staying the course has led to a roughly .500 record for quite some time now.

But, then again, you don't think there's much difference between an 81 win team and a 97 win team, so.......