Maxbialystock

Yes, I do see the difference, but I think you have to agree that "clueless" is a fairly definitive statement about this manager. It's also indefensible.

If you reread the above, you can see you already believe Farrell is clueless: "like Farrell sucks when it comes to making a pitching change." If anyone is putting words in your mouth, it's you. As for yesterday, you're right. You said nothing about Farrell, which is the biggest clue he did everything right. I notice however you were sparing in your criticism of the lineup, Kimbrel, and Holt. I'm pretty sure Farrell said publicly that Wright must learn how to pitch in hot and/or wet weather. Whitey not using that line when negotiating his contract doesn't make it irrelevant. Joe Torre was a loser before managing the Yankees and Mariano Rivera. As I said previously, Joe Maddon is highly regarded and has the best W-L record and best ERA in MLB with the Cubs this year, but Epstein still wanted to shore up the bullpen with the Yankees ace closer. Bullpens do make a difference. And ours is unreliable. That said, I too hope that now and then Farrell can pull a rabbit from a hat and bring in someone, anyone, who is actually effective when it counts. You are right to defend Kimbrel, but Kimmi is also right that this ain't the Kimbrel of yesteryear. Nor is Uehara. As for Ziegler, the report is he ain't great against lefty bats. And so on. I had hoped to find an article saying we have the worst or among the worst five bullpens in MLB, but could not. So our bullpen is merely "unreliable." This gives me room to complain about the pitchers and you room to complain about the manager's decisions. In 2013 with the same manager but a very different team, neither of us had much to complain about.

Smoltz didn't have a splitter. I think the difference between a so-so Tazawa and a good Tazawa is that forkball of his. When it is on, it makes his fastball a ton more effective. Same as Kimbrel and that knuckle curve. Or Andrew Miller combining that very good fastball with a devastating slider that is almost as fast. But I'm not building my hopes up. I just want Farrell to try Uehara a couple of times and it doesn't even need to be in pressure situations.

I think Pedroia got a great deal for several reasons. First and foremost, the MVP award was anomalous--earned, but it occurred at just the right moment when the competition was less that normal. Second, he is a small guy, which to me means diminishing strength, speed, reflexes over time. Right now, 2016, he is 33 and having almost a career year--a huge bargain for the Sox--but he gets paid through 2021, when he will be 38, and those years, 2017 thru 2021, are the higher paid years of his contract. Most of all, I think Pedroia and his wife like it in Boston and figured out, as few ballplayers seem to do these days, that making an average of $14M/year over 8 years is a king's ransom and more than enough to live very comfortably for the rest of their lives. Plus Pedroia loves to play the game, which is something players usually don't figure out until they are near the end of their careers. Too many players don't realize that they are actually playing for their agents, who are the real beneficiaries of these inflated salaries. As for Jon Lester, I think he just got the going rate, one, it turns out, the Sox could afford, especially when Price is getting $5M/season more and for one extra year. I think he would have stayed if the Sox first offer had been better. I also think he was lost forever when the Sox let him go during the 2014 season.

Rely might be the wrong word for Uehara, but maybe try fits. He's 41, but has never relied on strength. He throws two pitches, an 86-89 mpg "fastball" and, when it is on, a devastating splitter because it starts out looking like that fastball. He also has excellent control and a ton of guts to even throw that fastball. The point is, Farrell needs to try him out and see what's working. If the control and the splitter are working, he could maybe be the set up man. As I understand this bullpen, right now Kimbrel is the closer and the 7th and 8th are up for grabs with Ziegler the best choice for the 8th and Ross or Barnes for the 7th. But I've read Farrell doesn't like Ziegler against lefty bats and maybe Ross against righties and Barnes against lefties. Or put it this way. If Uehara is on, this bullpen could sure use some help.

Kimmi makes some very good points about Kimbrel's downturn this year, but he is still the best closer when he has his best stuff, which basically means command of two pitches, the fast ball and the knuckle curve. Together they can obliterate the best hitters, but he needs to command both. When he loses control of the knuckle curve, hitters can and will sit on his fast ball and hit it hard. When he loses both, he walks guys, sometimes lots of them. I also like moonslav's point about ERod, that just maybe he has come into his own and might even be better than last year. This game underscored what can kill the Sox. Even after swamping the A's in the first two games, they couldn't score a run yesterday and had to depend on a bullpen which has proven time and again to be undependable.

I can't argue with any of that and was unaware of that 1200 AB concept, which makes sense for most players. Moncada isn't most players, but he also has had a whole lot less professional time than most players. Plus, as you say, the Cuban "suddenly I'm rich" thing.

What venting? I just took your position--that it's the manager's job (and, by inference, not the player's job) to ensure a player excels--to an extreme. I think I've already agreed that pinch-running with Wright was ill-advised, but had to throw in the fact that Wright also doesn't want to pitch in damp weather or in very hot weather even though other pitchers are expected to because it's part of the game. I kind of liked that new rule for Farrell: to treat Wright they same way he would treat his own mother. Right out of A League of Their Own, and I chose it because to me Wright looks a tad girly even though women actually play pretty good fast pitch softball. As I said when he was injured, he's 32 years old and acts like he's 50. If he were in the NL, his complaint that he couldn't possibly score from 2B on a single would be laughable. If he were to start in the WS, he might be the only pitcher ever to be walked intentionally--just so the other team could laugh at his timidity in refusing to take any lead at all off 1B. The real issue between us is your inclination to blame the manager first and the player second, and mine is the exact opposite. As I have said countless times, all managers make relatively rational decisions because they are reinforced by stats, experience, close-at-hand advisers (bench coach, pitching coach), and ample time to make key decisions. So to me the deciding factor in virtually all games is some combination of the players in the game. Thus Whitey Herzog makes sense when he says the difference between good managers and bad managers is a good bullpen. Yesterday we saw ERod pitch his heart out, and then saw the Sox bullpen and the lineup which couldn't score a run piss it away. The entire lineup was put in a position, in your words, to excel, but could not. Our high-priced closer Kimbrel was too, and he walked a guy and then gave up a game-winning double off the wall which Holt didn't field all that cleanly. To be honest, Kimbrel's ineptitude may have been merciful because that game was going to continue until the Athletics--and certainly not the moribund Sox--scored the winning run.

Interesting how people leap to Moncada's defense. Look, I know he is the #1 rated prospect in MLB. My point is that he is also a rookie and a raw rookie at that. If there is a rationale for the minors, including AAA, it is for young players to learn and work on their weaknesses before they get to the Show. As I pointed out, Sox Prospects talks at length about his speed, strong arm, swing, etc. But it also says he tends to lose focus, and we are already seeing that in spades. Bogaerts, I hasten to add, was completely focused from the day he got here. As talented as he is, determination may be his strongest suit. And Betts is in the same category--talented and determined. My guess would be that the Orioles Machado was the same way when he came up. Let's hope the determination part rubs off on Moncada, but it won't be easy because he already has some big money and a lot of adulation from the press.

A very pretty point you make. Based on what we've seen, we might also include among Farrell's bad in game tactics-- Letting Benintendi get into a game situation where he would have to avoid a tag and do injury to himself. For that matter, he should have been told beforehand not to make that spectacular catch the game before because that too would risk injury. Good managers don't let those things happen, especially to rookies. Forcing Moncada to play 3B and thereby putting him in position to misplay a routine grounder, to say nothing of allowing him to take to big a lead off 1B thereby getting him picked off by a mile. Very poor management there and certainly not in the spirit of putting his players in a position to excel. Not just forcing poor Wright to pinch run, but also making him pitch in adverse conditions--too hot, too wet, etc. How was that putting Wright in the best position to succeed? A simple rule should suffice: Farrell should treat Wright the same way he would treat his own mother. Last year expecting Sandoval to play 3B when he was clearly not in shape to play. I'm surprised the MLBPA didn't come down on him for that one. Terrible judgment. Keeping players in the lineup when they are in slumps. Many's the time we've read on Talksox that Bogaerts or JBJ or whoever should be rested because they weren't hitting. If a manager can't nurture the delicate psyches of his players, what good is he? Bringing any relief pitcher in when men are already on base. Every reliever deserves a clean inning, preferably against the bottom part of the order. Speaking of which, a closer should close, period. None of this pitching in late and close games when the score is tied or the Sox are down one. In addition, on the off chance the closer has lost his control, the manager alone is responsible for stopping the bleeding by selecting precisely the right reliever to come in and save the day. In no way should a closer be expected to perform as a professional baseball player. He is to be coddled and nurtured so that he can give his best in the least trying of circumstances. Making a starter keep pitching at the first sign of trouble. How can that be interpreted as bringing out the best in him? Mr. Wright could cite chapter and verse on this topic. Not playing Shaw when he has a hot bat. For that matter, not playing Moncada when he is clearly the greatest Sox rookie ever. Playing Young against a righty starter or reliever. Madness. Making poor Buchholz bounce back and forth between starting and relieving. This is a highly paid professional who deserves every consideration and, clearly, a full-time position in the rotation. Or as the closer. Or as the setup man. Or something.

Ziegler and Ross were warming up in case ERod had a problem in the 8th, pure and simple.

No. The bottom line is that everyone in the bullpen is a gamble and in this particular game the lineup stank to high heaven. It is a safe bet they were never going to score a run if the game when 20 innings.

This loss is on Kimbrel, pure and simple. He doesn't do anything best anymore. He has control issues at the worst times with and without a lead. And let's not forget that lineup had 9 innings and failed to get even a double, let alone a run scored. And you want to blame this on the manager?

It's a tie game in the 9th and Kimbrel is the best in the bullpen right now. That he gave up a walk and a dinger is simple confirmation that the bullpen stinks.

Maybe Moncada needs to wise up. First a bad error, then picked off 1B by a mile. Talent ain't enough if you don't pay attention.

Sox paid a lot of money for two bonehead plays in about 10 minutes--blew an easy grounder right to him and then got picked off at 1B and it wasn't even close. He's clearly a great athlete with real talent, but the write up in Sox Prospects says he has a problem focusing.

It's not even pessimism. It's realism. Baseball can be like that if a pitcher is on and/or another is off. Toronto just lost 2 straight to the Rays in the Trop. s*** happens.

Agree with all points about the game, especially the Rays runner slowing down to give Betts a shot at preventing that score by going to 2B quickly. A pretty good bet he won't forget that bonehead play anytime soon.

Actually, you have a point. The hindsight accusation was incorrect. You were just explaining how Kimbrel could have been available in the 8th. To that issue--Farrell said in the postgame he used Kimbrel the night before because he hadn't pitched in six days and needed the work. One could fairly argue that Kimbrel was so effective yesterday in the 9th precisely because he had pitched the night before and not gone 7 days between stints. I also believe in retrospect--another word for hindsight--that Tazawa wasn't that bad a choice. When he went in, I was mad. But, as I said, he threw strikes and should have gotten that first guy out. I also think that appearance might have good consequences down the road because his fork ball was working better than it has in awhile. His fast ball will only work if the forkball is also working, and by that I don't mean a forkball that bounces in front of the plate and is no threat to the hitter.

Good stuff, thanks. To summarize, you think Leon and Vazquez aren't far apart in CS%, catching the knuckler, fielding behind the plate, etc. The two big differences are: Vazquez is better at framing pitches, and Leon is a better hitter. You also think Vazquez is better at calling a game and leadership, but I have my doubts because I sure never saw it in terms of how our guys were pitching when Vazquez was behind the plate. Indeed, since Vazquez went back to AAA, the rotation has gotten steadily better--the bullpen not so much, however. Sox Prospects write-up says Vazquez has gold glove potential even though--when they wrote it--he is far from perfect defensively.

OK, let's talk defense--as hard as that can be to quantify. We already know that Leon is significantly better than Vazquez at throwing out base runners. He seems to have done OK at catching Wright's knuckler, but I don't remember whether Vazquez ever did that or how well. As for calling a game, I doubt that Vazquez is any better. I suspect he is better--but not a lot better--at preventing wild pitches and passed balls when catching other guys besides Wright. But is he really better at framing pitches, which some would argue is a very big deal because it affects how the umpires call balls and strikes? I would argue that maybe he isn't because, if he were, he would not have gone back to AAA so quickly after coming up to replace Swihart. Them's my thoughts, nothing more. Feel free to jump all over them.

About Moncada playing 3B. The Sox Prospects piece on him says that long term he is probably better suited physically to be at 3B or in the outfield. He has, for example, a strong arm. The piece also says his weakness on defense is lack of focus, which I think would also argue in favor of 3B or 2B--3B is simpler. Someone else wrote that Moncada might have a harder time adjusting to MLB pitching than did Benintendi. This makes sense to me. But it also makes all kinds of sense to bring him up now and let Farrell decide when and how to use him because this is the month, September, for doing this to all your best prospects.

Good stuff, moonslav, as always. But, as you say, "let's just see how much some GM loved one of our kids." You cited offensive stats, which suggests you value them more, which also suggests why the Sox hung onto Salty so long and why he is the starting catcher for the Tigers, who themselves are in the hunt this year. If the catcher's OPS is so important, Swihart is far more valuable than Vazquez.

That's a sensible statement, but I have to repeat: if bullpens aren't important, why did Epstein, whose team has the best record in MLB, a solid bullpen, and a very solid manager, go out and get Chapman of the Yankees? And why does every single MLB team have 12 out of 25 roster spots for pitchers alone and just 13 to cover the other 8 positions (or in the case of the AL, the other 9 positions)? Indeed, the five starters on average pitch over the half the innings, which leaves maybe 3 (no more than 4) innings on average for the 7 guys in the bullpen to cover. I personally focus mostly on the rotation and the lineup, but smart GM's give due diligence to that bullpen. Did you know that the Sox ERA in the 2013 playoffs was 2.00 and the bullpen, which gave up 2 runs in 16 games, was even better than that?

No, he is not a terrible tactician. If he were, DD would not hesitate to fire him and the Sox could never have overcome his terribleness in 2013. Kimmi and others have pointed out that the manager definitely has to manage egos and keep the team focused. Yes, they are highly paid professionals and playing a game they presumably love to play, but a MLB season is unbelievably long and made more so by all the pitcher/batter idiosyncrasies that make games almost interminable. Plus someone actually has to make those tactical decisions during the game and not leave it to a statistician or a meeting of the coaches. I think Joe Maddon is a smart manager, but also think his best attribute is creating a positive environment for his players. He is naturally upbeat and seems not to be overly intense or obsessive. While I agree relations with the press shouldn't matter much, it does seem important in Boston, and no way can press secretaries answer questions routinely handled by managers. Grilling a manager after every single ballgame is obligatory for every single team in MLB, and the Boston media in particular thrive on it.