sk7326

Also, he did a lot of tinkering which made him look smarter. Lots of stuff with tiny samples.

One of the fun things about baseball is that fans are so familiar with all of the tactics and levers to pull. Things basically happen one at a time - it's not like the other sports where all the players are moving at once. It's easy to want to pull a bunch of moves - and think along with the manager. Bobby Cox, Francona, Earl Weaver (all great managers in their time) - all got harangued I think for not bunting, not hit and running ... for more or less (usually) let the players play. Of course, that is (in general, if the players are good) the right thing to do. Also managers are like any other job - they can get better. Francona and Bochy have. I'll use Francona as my soapbox - although Bochy and Maddon certainly could be advocated if you wanted. 1. Created a comfortable work environment. He resembled (to me) a good manager at a real job. Made great pains not to humiliate his players. Not every player thrived, but that happens with everybody. Managed one of the more ego-filled clubhouses you will every see, and got people to pull in the same direction - a lot of times just by being a remarkably decent man. 2. Managed coaches - The Red Sox staff turned over a lot over that time. Lot of coaches came through, but the overall quality on that end did not suffer. 3. Managed the media - He was effectively the Red Sox Press Secretary. He represented the Red Sox as a corporation wonderfully. 4. Integrated young players - Supervised one successful transition of players. When the GM wanted to usher out vets and play younger players, Francona could do that too. He gave the kids playing time, defended them in public, while developing and holding them accountable. Pedroia (example I always go to) was handed the 2B job without much big league evidence in his corner, but was given the time to breathe and grow into job while not compromising the big league mission. I think his background in both managing, and player personnel helped.

He had it going - a mere 3 games before that he had not. C'est baseball. Fun aside: Ortiz' 2013 ALCS is probably the most fondly remembered crappy performance in baseball history.

The World Series where Bonds was .471/.700/1.294 and hit 4 homeruns? The Angels won the World Series because the Giants could not hold a 5 run lead with 9 outs to go.

There are no absolutes. I think managing in 2012 had passed Bobby by. His experience was not recent.

1. There is literally nobody who is going over printouts when a dude is on deck. The manager already knows the guys to call up in situations and such. Heck, I think the Pirates have an analytics guy on staff traveling with Hurdle to advise him on defensive positioning. 2. Repeatedly walking a guy is generally crappy baseball. Ortiz was ungodly hot for 6 games coming off of a series where he went 2 for 22. Sometimes you tip your hat to the other guy. Pitching around a guy is like bunting - it sounds like a good idea, but in fact very rarely is. 3. Agreed on Matheny and Ausmus, who in game miss things which seem obvious. At the same time they have won a lot (which tells you a lot about the actual magnitude of the impact of in game tactics). In particular Matheny has handled young players well as the Cardinals put new guys out all the time.

I hope - but he has to hit. The hypothesis was that his awful defense bled into his hitting last year. (along with the shoulder issue) This year that has not changed yet. There is time of course.

Oh, quite the opposite. Yes, they don't say anything interesting ... but the job of getting between the media pressure/fans need to know and the players (whose job is tough enough already) is extremely underrated. Francona's work there was crucial to allowing the team to trot out Dustin Pedroia day after day at 2B the first couple months of his career, look completely unqualified to be a major leaguer and figure this thing out himself.

Now there are some problems - Rosenthal wrote a great piece on it - fancy degreed GMs hiring people they know and skipping over guys who have cut their teeth managing in the minors. It also makes the field unnecessarily whitebread. It's what makes Farrell a particular disappointment. His resume was perfect for the job but it has not worked out as well as it should have on paper.

Are you sure most of them are bad managers of people? That seems unlikely - players play hard for the most part. There are lot who deploy them incorrectly. Hell, Showalter is very accomplished, and managed to take a preseason favorite and lead them to a 69 win season.

I think the pen is a bit out of his control with the lack of innings the starters were giving him. The one thing I give him crap for is when he warms up Uehara without using him (which happened in the TB series). You know his miles are limited - make them count.

I think a lot of guys still think the job is like the managers in the movies. I think in 2016, it is a much more corporate gig and the guys who can work that part as well as the baseball are a much more exclusive set. The combination of media relations, executing organizational strategy, managing a coaching staff ... in addition to the stuff in the dugouts during those 3 or so hour a night ... that is a really complex deal.

Maybe .. Mike Lowell was not espacially patient

It does - in so far that it is a real job that some people do better than others. I live outside of DC, so I got to witness the Matt Williams experience up close. It'd be nice to have a guy who has at least managed somewhere professionally. (Gabe Kapler would be another really good candidate) For this job in particular, a true first timer would be hard to work with. Francona had a perfect storm of qualifications - that doesn't happen every day.

Devers can either stay at 3B or move to another LF/1B (if he hits the milestones expected). Nobody significant is blocking any of those spots. Moncada is likely to go to a corner too. He is playing 2B which makes sense, but given his size and age - he is probably going to outgrow it. In terms of guys who could be dealt? Swihart - you'd have to get something really good for the deal he's in. (like a #2/#3 pitcher with at least another year of control) His star has not been dimmed. He has burned two of his options, so the Sox will have to make decision on him one way or the other. Somebody named Travis - you could go either way on this. There is no doubt that Shaw is a legitimate starter. But Travis could be ready for the bigs by the end of this year, and Ramirez could probably handle 3B. One again, this assumes there is a deal which makes sense to move Shaw. Travis has his own potential as a high on-base 15 HR Dave Magadan sort of guy ... that is a solid starter as well. Jackie Bradley - he has done a lot to rehabilitate his stock. A quality center fielder who is cheap and controlled has innate value, especially since he seems to look like he can hit. Now offensively he is a baby Mike Napoli, the hot streaks can be great and the slumps can be deadly but the on base skills should play. But really, if Moncada is the real thing, Betts at CF and Moncada in RF makes a ton of sense. Deven Merrero - a vacuum cleaner middle if who can hit enough to play. Not a centerpiece, but a very useful trade enhancer.

There are two general aspects to managing - the part we see and the part we don't. UN is right - relative to the part we see, Farrell is not very good. He makes suboptimal bullpen decisions, and while in 2013 there was decent evidence he knew how to deploy the position players optimally, that has not continued in 2014-15. His treatment of the young players in particular (and I cannot separate this from management since he is following their strategy) has been profoundly problematic. To the part we don't see - Farrell is better. The players respect him, and I don't think you have the sort of dogging it open rebellion issues which plague lesser leaders. He also has dealt well with the media, which is a very important part of the gig.

I'm glad he does. Does not alter the likelihood that Varitek's actual impact on something like that was moderate. Pedro had one of the best pitching years of all time before he got to Boston and well, you know his time here. And none of that has anything to do with his managerial qualifications (basically, none).

To me there was something to the idea that he wanted to play here (and with Ortiz and whanot) that he was willing to try something new. And then between his shoulder and the disaster in LF, things got to his head. Right now, he is doing something defensively that fits him. Hopefully the offense comes around - walk rate is a bit frightening so far.

Absolutely not - Tek has never filled in a lineup card. His time as catcher is wildly overrated - he was an outstanding catcher, but vintage Pedro Martinez could make a trained seal look good back there. If Farrell is gone, you look at guys like Lovullo, Alex Cora, Bud Black. Managing is an actual job - and I'd like somebody with some experience doing it.

Also underrated was Ortiz' remarkable revival - if you remember 2008 (where he was borderline useless against the Rays) through 2010 there was a decline which raised legitimate questions as to whether the party was over.

Well 2013 he was worthy of being on MVP ballots (basically the best AL CF not named Trout). (at least downballot) The Yankees thought they were getting that CF defense augmented by the chance to drop the head of the bat on some inside pitches and pull some homeruns. For that price it was a reasonable bet for a team with their coffers. A bet that hasn't worked, obviously.

Ortiz' legacy to me has to be the greatest non-tender FA in the history of free agency. His last season in Minnesota was .272/.339/.500 which is quite good, but given 2002 offensive norms (1.3/1.1 bWAR/fWAR and 118 rc+) it was a fairly disposable performance. Just remarkable.

0.4/1.5 depending on flavour ... the fangraphs post on him seemed reasonable http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/blake-swihart-the-red-sox-mythical-third-prospect/

One more season after this to be exact - since that's his last option year.

I think we get clouded because the comparison is with somebody who is a bit of a prodigy. This is not Ryan Lavarnway or late career Mike Piazza.