Maxbialystock

I'm divided on the rest days notion. Yes, they have now become normal because managers recognize their value. But I also believe that what makes MLB unique is that 162 game schedule that drives right thru the dog days of July and August. That brings out the toughness in players, the ability to stay focused and to keep playing with great skill at bat and in the field. Can you imagine playing, as Kimmi points out, 43 games in 44 days with all that heat and the idea of having to stay focused while that damn pitcher is strolling around the mound trying to decide whether to throw his next pitch? Games average over 3 hours and half of that is spent in the field and being up for every single one of, I'm guessing, 100 to 150 pitches. Remember the scandal of PED's? I'm guessing the first was amphetamines, which I would argue were needed when pitchers like Buchholz would be on the mound with his thumb mostly up his ass. Or the pitchers who lose their control and start walking guys while the fielders have to remain alert on every pitch in case, heaven forbid, the batter swings and hits it. While I appreciate the days off and agree to their value, I also appreciate the tough guys who somehow stay focused and productive in July and August. TS Eliot wrote that April is the cruelest month, which explains why he moved to England and became a citizen. Unlike Bo, TS did not know baseball.

He is not worth a thread of his own other than to say he is probably the single best reason for Cherington losing his job. I looked at his numbers hoping to find something redeeming, but could not. The most appalling number is his salary, more than double the highest he was ever paid by the Giants, who got his best years.

Ozzie Smith at SS and almost anyone at 2B. Our current keystone combination is probably average at best. Bogaerts doesn't have much range and only a decent not great arm. He benefits from being teamed with Pedroia, who nevertheless has lost a step.

Rare lineup today against righty Greinke: no consecutive righty hitters. Pedroia, Holt (at SS), Betts, Ortiz, Ramirez, Bradley, Hill (righty hitter at 3B in for Shaw), Leon, and Benintendi. Overall, four righty bats and five lefty. My guess on Bogaerts is he is out against a righty because of the slump which was especially noticeable last night. But Shaw? Maybe a rest? Maybe his defense? I used to think our big problems were the bullpen and the up and down hitting. But now I recognize that the only liability we have today is Farrell, who, judging by the steady bombardment of comments, has no feel for the game, no sense of when to make a move and when not to, no understanding whatsoever of his bullpen, no sense of how to assemble a lineup, no rein on the reckless baserunning, and a softness for players who make errors at the worst possible moments. This just goes to show you what a fantastic team Dombrowski has assembled--great rotation,especially with the additions of Price and Pomeranz, great bullpen (with the additions of Kimbrel, Ziegler, and Abad), and great lineup with the additions of Young and Hill and that catcher guy. These guys are now 11 games above .500 despite the worst efforts of Farrell.

Kimmi, kimmi, kimmi. The key to a700hitter is that he is quite simply a contrarian when it comes to managers, especially Red Sox managers. His starting point is that they can do nothing right. I used to say that some Sox fans--bloggers--believe that good managers simply don't lose games. If a game is lost, it must be, it can only be because the manager failed to do something or did something he should not have. But a700hitter goes beyond that with Farrell, who he believes--or says he believes--Farrell is wrong even when the Sox win. And he is wrong, a700hitter's words, because he is an idiot and incapable of doing anything right--with the occasional exception of when he accidentally and unintentionally does something right. The blind squirrel phenomenon. I can appreciate a700hitter's perspective because mine is identical from the opposite side. I think managers, not just Farrell, are almost always right or at least have a rational basis for whatever decision they make. I believe, almost fervently, that players determine the outcome of games, which is what makes baseball such a great game. I think managers, coaches, and umpires are all necessary and even that some are better than others, but do not think they prevent the better team from winning. I honestly feel sorry for anyone who thinks that managers and umpires are the real keys to game outcomes or, more importantly, that their actions and decisions are more worthy of discussion than those of the players. To me that's like looking at a great painting and discussing the frame.

Meh. It was righty Cabrera who clobbered one for the game winner. Yes, I agree Ziegler is better against righties, but I also think his effectiveness over-relies on the unusual motion and angle of attack of his arm slot. When the hitter ignores the motion and focuses on the ball, Ziegler is hittable.

Gotta go with Eck. Terrible unis--from zombie land.

Sure there can be a discussion. In case you've forgotten, he was the leadoff for the first half of the season, which is only the best offensive first half the Sox have had in the John Henry era. I am not against batting him third, but you cannot convince me his leading off was a bad idea when the results were so darn good.

I have heartburn with Farrell too, but the comparison to Girardi is flaky. Specifically, In game 1 Girardi was the one who left his starter Severino in too long which cost the Yankees the game. Me, I think 5 runs is OK for a starter if you're trying to save your bullpen, but you guys have tough standards. Farrell meanwhile, handled his pitchers to perfection. He kept Porcello in for 110 pitches, 8 innings, and 2 runs. Then he brought in our $9M closer Kimbrel, who promptly disintegrated, but not enough to cost the game. At just the right moment, in came Barnes to get the K and the save. In game 2 Girardi wasn't brilliant. He simply had no choice. His starter couldn't go beyond 1 inning, simple as that. He ended up using 8 pitchers who got away with just 4 runs because our guys were 2 for 11 with RISP. In the 6th Pomeranz typically ran out of steam, and brought in Buch, who, we should note, was now officially a starter, at the right time to get the GIDP on 3 pitches and the Sox into the 7th inning with a 4-1 lead. Then, according to you guys, Farrell blundered by bringing in Barnes, the same guy who got the save the night before and only faced one batter, to get the Sox to the 8th inning, that is, to get three outs. Instead, he gave up 3 hits and 3 runs and got only 1 out. How in the world is that the manager's fault? You guys over-rely on 20-20 hindsight. Next came the newly acquired lefty Abad, who promptly gave up 2 more runs while only getting 1 out. This too was not Farrel's fault. Finally, Tazawa comes in to give up 2 more runs and to get the final out. The only reasonable explanation for that debacle is that bullpen collapsed. They were handed a 4-1 lead and couldn't even hold it for 1 inning. There's more. You guys keep talking about how aggressive Girardi was. I've already pointed out he had not choice for the first five innings. In the final four innings when the game was decided, it was Farrell, not Girardi, who used the most pitchers--5 to 3. Girardi used fewer pitchers because his relievers were getting outs and in fact closed the game with 4 shutout innings. To me it is beyond question that the difference in game 2 was that one team had a good bullpen and the other had a pile of s***. You guys want me to believe Farrell was stupid because he didn't use two starters to finish the entire game in game 2. Lots of luck with that. As for game 3, I agree it is arguable on whether Farrell should have sent ERod back out to pitch the 8th. But guess what? Assuming he did pitch the 8th, Ziegler still comes out for the 9th and is still a good bet to give up some runs because he clearly over-relies on the uncoventional pitching motion and angle of attack. When I look back on the Yankees series what I see is an absolutely horrendous bullpen which would have lost all 3 games if Farrell hadn't intervened in the 9th of game 1. I also see weak hitting. And who was our best reliever in the series? The only guy who was now a starter and only needed 3 pitches to get 2 outs. We don't know if he could have done the same thing in the 7th, but we do know one thing. Once Buchholz left the game, the rest of the bullpen was ready to s*** in their pants again. I am not really defending Farrell because I would have no objection if he were fired today. What I am defending is the notion that the bullpen was our problem in the Yankees series and secondarily our hitting.

I didn't want to change, but in fact like the new lineup despite it's lack of success. I gather Arizona is starting a lefty. Wouldn't it be nice if we could hit one for a change? As for Price, he is still struggling. For those disparaging Farrell's decisions on relievers, I would remind one and all that right now there no dependable arms in the bullpen. On top of that, there is no reliable gauge on when Price will blow up. The hitting is also erratic, but mostly bad.

Excellent thread. I love the optimism of the OP, but am influenced by the two big things already mentioned: horrible bullpen, tougher schedule than other claimants to a playoff berth. Others have said our players look they don't care, and I disagree. I think they maybe care too much and are consequently playing tight. I doubt that Farrell is alleviating the tightness. That's really up to the clubhouse leaders. My point is that I believe that the OP's optimism is justified if these guys can return to the way they were playing in the first half of the season. I would be tempted to try keeping the same players and not to platoon: Betts, Bogaerts, Pedroia, Ortiz, HanRam, JBJ, Leon, Shaw, Benintendi. Rotation is set (Buch for Wright is temporary). As for the bullpen, I think Farrell, Lovullo and the pitching coach need to redo their assessments of the bullpen and try to come up with the best three for the 7th, 8th,and 9th innings. My candidates--only that--would be Barnes, Buchholz, and Kimbrel, and the other four are subject to getting jerked as soon as they screw the pooch. I am not against firing Farrell but am assuming John Henry won't do it now.

Actually, he did get lit up. Didn't the "ace" Price go 7 great innings the other night and then get hammered in the 8th, after which this board lit up with people saying that only dumb manager like Farrell would have brought out Price to pitch the 8th even though he had only thrown 89 pitches. Hindsight is the key half the comments on talksox. After the fact, we are all so sure of what Farrell should have done. I say again, however, that I honestly think right now John Farrell is vulnerable (to being fired) and should be. You can't fire the team.

I'm not in favor of trades right now--for Beltran or anyone. Dombrowski to me has so far underperformed, so turning him loose again would probably make things worse.

I hope you realize when you say it's the manager's job to make the players successful, you are taking them off the hook. If they strike out with the bases loaded, it's Farrell's fault Error by Benintendi leading to two unearned runs--Farrell's fault. Wright injures himself by stupidly getting too big a lead, Farrell's fault. Kimbrel walks 4 guys in the 9th, blame it on the manager. Lack of clutch hitting and low RISP OPS, John did it. My favorite is when Farrell takes a starter out. If the bullpen screws up, Farrell took him out too soon. If the starter gives up too many runs, he didn't get the hook soon enough (even though the bullpen stinks).

I disagree with almost all of the comments about Farrell's decisions, which I think have been fine. But I would fire him today on general principles. Think of him as heifer who needs to be sacrificed. If the players aren't in the locker room eating chicken and drinking beer during games, they ought to be. I also have my doubts about Dombrowski. Most of his acquisitions have not measured up to the price paid. Indeed, Price, Abad, Pomeranz, Ziegler, and Kimbrel have been demonstrably worse than advertised. Young's OK, but on the DL. Hill is not OK.

I like that. I don't agree with the part about all managers, including Girardi, but I love that you said it. And I am not being facetious or ironic or sarcastic.

Actually, you are giving the players a free pass, especially the four relievers who gave up 8 runs in 2 innings. Farrell made a reasonable choice in having Buch finish up the 6th even though he was pitching Saturday and going to Barnes in the 7th. Remember Barnes? His last time out he rescued Kimbrel who left him the bases loaded by getting a big K. And here you are saying it was unreasonable to send Barnes out to pitch the 7th. Indeed, you rave about the brilliance of Girardi sending out pitcher after pitcher, not of whom pitched more than 2 innings, and complain when Farrell does the same thing. Indeed, in the decisive final 4 innings of the game, Farrell used more pitchers than Girardi. The difference was that Girardi's bullpen was getting guys out and our guys weren't. So, yes, you are giving the bullpen a complete pass. About sending out Wright to run the bases and perform that Herculean task of maybe trying to score from 2B on a single. Did you notice that last night Ortiz had to be helped into the dugout? Did you then notice him tonight, 9 years older and 50 pounds heavier than Wright, scoring from 2B on a single? And think about this. If Farrell had followed Girardi's lead and brought the bullpen in in the 2d inning, the Sox would have lost by 10 runs or more. Every decision he made was reasonable, but the bullpen failed him and us.

Whoa, nellie. Surely you didn't expect Farrell to follow Girardi's lead and dump Pomeranz after 2 innings? When you look at the box score, the numbers are clear: Farrell had the good starter, but absolutely the worst bullpen. Even though Pomeranz went 5.1 innings and Eovaldi (Yankees starter) only went 1 inning, the Sox ended up using 7 pitchers to the Yankees 8. In the 7th inning alone Farrell sent three guys out there--Barnes, Abad, and Tazawa--and they all s*** their pants giving up 3, 2, and 2 runs, which was basically the ballgame. If you leave Buch in for the 7th, those three clowns still come out and give away the farm in the 8th inning. And let's not forget the abysmal Sox hitting. A Yankees pitcher named Clippard pitched 1 inning and gave up 3 hits and a walk but no runs. Farrell sent out 4 relievers--Barnes,Abad, Tazawa, and Ross--with ERA's of 3.48, 3.19, 3.96, and 3.89 and they gave up 3, 2, 2, and 1 run. Why was that Farrell's fault?

Meh. You make running the bases sound like a decathlon or something. it's just running the bases, something all of us have done. When I was Wright's age I did it all the time with little or no risk to my health. I also played full court basketball. Heck, I did both when I was 10 years older than Wright. It sure sounds as those the DH is turning AL pitchers into a bunch of wimps.

Please reread what you wrote. First you said Farrell did the right thing when he brought Buchholz into the game, then that he is "beyond stupid" and "has no game sense." Both can't be true. As illinoisox points out, you are also assuming that, once Buchholz pitched through the 7th, the bullpen would have somehow transformed itself into something reliable when in fact we know that they are in complete disarray. We just saw Kimbrel--you know, the $9M closer--implode in the worst possible fashion. Ziegler has problems when hitters ignore his unusual delivery and just focus on the ball and hit it. Barnes, Abad, Ross, et al actually pitched last night and were terrible. At some point I think you have to admit that the players have some responsibility for the outcome of games. Speaking of which, the lineup also stank. Early on they twice had the bases loaded with one man out and only brought in one run each time. Then they started an inning with men on 2d and 3d and no one out with the top of the order coming up. Pedroia drove in one, but only one more scored. I am fine with blaming Farrell for overall wins and losses. I am not saying his job his by any means secure. But I am saying that your rhetoric about Farrell being beyond stupid and having no game sense is not defensible. My version is that he brought Buchholz, our long reliever, in to get the Sox into the 7th inning when the regulars would take over. I would even agree that Buchholz could have stayed in to the end of the game because he's gone over 3 before and done well. Of course, that would then make starting on Saturday problematical.

Never doubt the seer of seers.

OK, this time I'm predicting some runs. This is the time the new lineup pays off.

There's a lot you don't get.

His move was perfect--see the results. Buch gets a GIDP and ends the inning/threat.

To be honest, I think changing the lineup was justified and that Pedroia, Bogaerts, Betts has potential. But still the guys are just choking away big opportunities. I mean palpable gagging.