SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Next year's manager
|
Post by elguapo on Oct 4, 2012 14:10:41 GMT -5
I would love to see Maddux & Maddux.
I think the Rangers losing could make that more likely....
|
|
|
Post by remember04 on Oct 4, 2012 14:13:48 GMT -5
So I don't remember but was anybody actually happy when he got hired? I don't think anybody expected it to be this bad but didn't we all foresee doom and gloom during the Bobby V era and no its just because we have the Red Sox fan mentality.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Oct 4, 2012 14:28:05 GMT -5
After last night's debate, it looks like BIG BIRD will be a free agent and available. He is a classy dresser, can actually fly over turbulence, gets along with young (really young) players, has great communication skills, and is NOT a chicken!
We could do a lot worse.....just ask Bobby V.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 4, 2012 14:33:18 GMT -5
So I don't remember but was anybody actually happy when he got hired? I don't think anybody expected it to be this bad but didn't we all foresee doom and gloom during the Bobby V era and no its just because we have the Red Sox fan mentality. Here is some of the old discussion from the old forums: forum-soxprospects.com/topic/7196/Who-s-the-next-manager-of-the-Red-Sox?page=14Not universally negative, but a strong majority were against hiring Valentine from the beginning.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 4, 2012 15:07:35 GMT -5
Yes, its the job of sports writers and talk show hosts to seek out answers to on field decisions, relations with the organization, and the like. But its also the job of, particularly the radio medium, to stir up some controversy to generate discussions. In this case I believe it handled the situation very unprofessionally. I can agree with you that the Boston media didn't have a great year either. There was, though, a bit of a self-perpetuating system in which the reporting fed what happened in the clubhouse which fed the reporting, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 4, 2012 15:09:03 GMT -5
As for pitching coaches, as pointed out by a writer on Twitter last night (forget who), it seems that the A's staff has been just fine this year under Curt Young. I think it's the pitchers' receptiveness to the coaching that has been lacking.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Oct 4, 2012 15:22:23 GMT -5
Pete Abraham @peteabe #RedSox just started their weird not a press conference. Bringing in one media outlet at a time. Never have seen this before......
seems odd
|
|
|
Post by remember04 on Oct 4, 2012 15:57:16 GMT -5
As for pitching coaches, as pointed out by a writer on Twitter last night (forget who), it seems that the A's staff has been just fine this year under Curt Young. I think it's the pitchers' receptiveness to the coaching that has been lacking. I liked the hire at the time and was upset he didn't get a longer look but dysfunction is as dysfunction does.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Oct 4, 2012 16:36:00 GMT -5
Pete Abraham @peteabe Cherington did not name any candidates. Lucchino said that MLB experience, unlike last season, is not being stressed.
|
|
|
Post by remember04 on Oct 4, 2012 17:57:15 GMT -5
Pete Abraham @peteabe Cherington did not name any candidates. Lucchino said that MLB experience, unlike last season, is not being stressed. Good to see Lucchino "may" learn from his mistakes. Bad to see Lucchino still involved in decision making.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Oct 4, 2012 18:08:46 GMT -5
Are we comfortable with some of the concerns that have arisen in Toronto, though? Amfox? Seems like Ausmus is a hot candidate too. Am I comfortable? Or is the front office comfortable? Their view is that TOR was essentially a training exercise for taking the job in Boston. I don't disagree with this (albeit cynical and Boston-centric) view. I note that, like Boston, TOR had tons of injuries this year. Unlike Boston, Farrell kept it classy. I would be comfortable with Farrell. I always viewed him as the heir apparent to Tito. If not Farrell, I listed a bunch of candidates earlier in the thread (reply #46), with Maddux, Cora and Beyeler leading the way (assuming Alomar, Jr. gets the CLE job; if not, he would be ahead of Cora but behind Maddux on my list). Amfox, not to be contrary, but how do you know that Sox management's view is that TOR was essentially a training exercise for Farrell and that he is now 'ready and able' to manage in Boston of all places? In media-subdued Toronto Farrell did not offer much, if anything, re his player's open homophobic slur (leadership issue) or negative comments from a player(s) also questioning that leadership. Should not these issues weigh considerably on Sox management in doing its own due diligence or is management and are we just so glad to get rid of BV that we just jump on board with the first convenient, pretty face? Hey, we all want the best manager. But, desperate times require the absolute greatest scrutiny across the board. Manager is the current operative focus. Understandably Farrell has something of an initial leg up because he is a known quantity, has familiarity with personnel and has background as a pitching coach. But our team ERA not only stunk this year but last (under Farrell). I say to management, 'take your time'. Yes, there is urgency but there is also time. We are not likely to compete for a title next year. If Farrell is our guy, I do not want to set him up for failure. Otherwise we may be having this same manager conversation next year. I would be more in favor of getting a perceived manager prodigy without giving something in return. If the team tanks, well our minor leaguers are closer to helping us and Farrell will have completed his Toronto contract.
|
|
|
Post by remember04 on Oct 4, 2012 19:08:32 GMT -5
Hey, we all want the best manager. But, desperate times require the absolute greatest scrutiny across the board. Manager is the current operative focus. Understandably Farrell has something of an initial leg up because he is a known quantity, has familiarity with personnel and has background as a pitching coach. But our team ERA not only stunk this year but last (under Farrell). Curt Young was our pitching coach last year
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Oct 4, 2012 19:22:12 GMT -5
Amfox, not to be contrary, but how do you know that Sox management's view is that TOR was essentially a training exercise for Farrell and that he is now 'ready and able' to manage in Boston of all places? In media-subdued Toronto Farrell did not offer much, if anything, re his player's open homophobic slur (leadership issue) or negative comments from a player(s) also questioning that leadership. Should not these issues weigh considerably on Sox management in doing its own due diligence or is management and are we just so glad to get rid of BV that we just jump on board with the first convenient, pretty face? Hey, we all want the best manager. But, desperate times require the absolute greatest scrutiny across the board. Manager is the current operative focus. Understandably Farrell has something of an initial leg up because he is a known quantity, has familiarity with personnel and has background as a pitching coach. But our team ERA not only stunk this year but last (under Farrell). I say to management, 'take your time'. Yes, there is urgency but there is also time. We are not likely to compete for a title next year. If Farrell is our guy, I do not want to set him up for failure. Otherwise we may be having this same manager conversation next year. I would be more in favor of getting a perceived manager prodigy without giving something in return. If the team tanks, well our minor leaguers are closer to helping us and Farrell will have completed his Toronto contract. I think the front office needs to do their due diligence, and I'm sure they have done so with respect to Farrell and the situation you referenced. Keep in mind that Valentine has been dead-man walking for a while, so I'm sure many possible candidates have been discussed and initially vetted. I believe it is absolutely critical to have a manager in place before free agency begins. I believe it is absolutely critical to ensure that the GM and manager are on the same page before additional players are recruited and/or acquired for this reclamation project. I also disagree with the point that Farrell will be available later. Either they hire him now or they both move on. The next managerial hire (Cherington's first real hire) will be here for at least 2-3 years. I guarantee we will not be having another managerial conversation next year.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Oct 4, 2012 19:58:27 GMT -5
Bob Nightengale @bnightengale The #Bluejays are not expected to stand in the way of the #redsox pursuit of John Farrell
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Oct 4, 2012 20:09:56 GMT -5
Im not sure what to think about Farrell. Seems like they didn't have a great clubhouse and now reports about them not standing in the way. I'd be okay with him but really hope Martinez and Maddux get looks.
|
|
|
Post by buffs4444 on Oct 4, 2012 20:21:00 GMT -5
Bob Nightengale @bnightengale The #Bluejays are not expected to stand in the way of the #redsox pursuit of John Farrell Perfect. Let's wrap this up asap and move forward with Farrell putting together his Boston staff.......
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Oct 4, 2012 20:21:54 GMT -5
Supposedly the Jays as a matter of practice don't bar employees from leaving in lateral moves - who knows.
My preference is for an outsider to provide a fresh start, but they could seeminly do a lot worse than Farrell.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Oct 4, 2012 20:32:26 GMT -5
Considering whats been reported lately i'm not sure if I like Farrell or not but I do know that I am against trading away any player in the system to acquire him.
|
|
|
Post by polarbear91 on Oct 4, 2012 20:36:26 GMT -5
Supposedly the Jays as a matter of practice don't bar employees from leaving in lateral moves - who knows. My preference is for an outsider to provide a fresh start, but they could seeminly do a lot worse than Farrell. That policy was revised last year when we tried to talk to Farrell. Now the policy states that it must be a promotion. Doesn't mean they won't waive it, but it was changes.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Oct 4, 2012 20:36:46 GMT -5
My season-long sturm und drang about Bobby V aside, I generally think competent managers are fairly common and don't get too caught up in searches like this. Farrell's certainly smart enough to handle the job and knows the Boston media ... and he'd have something to offer Jon Lester, probably.
|
|
|
Post by polarbear91 on Oct 4, 2012 20:37:25 GMT -5
"Changed". Damn big fingers.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Oct 4, 2012 21:20:29 GMT -5
Thanks polarbear.
IMO they should figure out this weekend whether or not Farrell is doable. If compensation is more than negligible, I say forget it and move on. Either the Jays want to keep Farrell or they don't - let's not kid around.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Oct 4, 2012 21:23:37 GMT -5
Amfox, not to be contrary, but how do you know that Sox management's view is that TOR was essentially a training exercise for Farrell and that he is now 'ready and able' to manage in Boston of all places? In media-subdued Toronto Farrell did not offer much, if anything, re his player's open homophobic slur (leadership issue) or negative comments from a player(s) also questioning that leadership. Should not these issues weigh considerably on Sox management in doing its own due diligence or is management and are we just so glad to get rid of BV that we just jump on board with the first convenient, pretty face? Hey, we all want the best manager. But, desperate times require the absolute greatest scrutiny across the board. Manager is the current operative focus. Understandably Farrell has something of an initial leg up because he is a known quantity, has familiarity with personnel and has background as a pitching coach. But our team ERA not only stunk this year but last (under Farrell). I say to management, 'take your time'. Yes, there is urgency but there is also time. We are not likely to compete for a title next year. If Farrell is our guy, I do not want to set him up for failure. Otherwise we may be having this same manager conversation next year. I would be more in favor of getting a perceived manager prodigy without giving something in return. If the team tanks, well our minor leaguers are closer to helping us and Farrell will have completed his Toronto contract. I think the front office needs to do their due diligence, and I'm sure they have done so with respect to Farrell and the situation you referenced. Keep in mind that Valentine has been dead-man walking for a while, so I'm sure many possible candidates have been discussed and initially vetted. I believe it is absolutely critical to have a manager in place before free agency begins. I believe it is absolutely critical to ensure that the GM and manager are on the same page before additional players are recruited and/or acquired for this reclamation project. I also disagree with the point that Farrell will be available later. Either they hire him now or they both move on. The next managerial hire (Cherington's first real hire) will be here for at least 2-3 years. I guarantee we will not be having another managerial conversation next year. Amfox I agree that there is a sense of urgency in hiring a new manager. And, I am sure the Sox have tried to determine the public/negative aspects of what transpired in Toronto re Farrell. Certainly it would be ideal to have a new manager prior to the free agency period and I expect that we will have that person. But, whoever we hire will ultimately be answerable to management if the team finishes say 78-84 or worse next season. We don't know who or how many free agents will be brought in but, if there are not a lot of acquisitions without expenditure of large dollars, we may well have another down year, record-wise. If we now hire someone other than JF, Farrell will be at the end of his contract with Toronto (unless he re-ups) and available at next year-end. In short, I think that Farrell is the easy and safe current choice. I don't think that Boston will execute that move if it makes an honest assessment of the team, its near-term prospects and its presumed incremental value of JF.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Oct 4, 2012 22:58:24 GMT -5
If this front office gives up anything more than a AAAA utility player or a 12th pitcher for any manager, then they are just as lost as they were last off-season. There are plenty of great candidates that will cost zero talent.
And if Cherrington is in his own words "responsible" for the turgid, flaccid mess that was the 2012 team why wasn't he canned, too? Ditto for Larry Lucchino.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 4, 2012 23:55:44 GMT -5
In media-subdued Toronto Farrell did not offer much, if anything, re his player's open homophobic slur (leadership issue) or negative comments from a player(s) also questioning that leadership. Should not these issues weigh considerably on Sox management in doing its own due diligence or is management and are we just so glad to get rid of BV that we just jump on board with the first convenient, pretty face? What John Farrell said to the media regarding these things has absolutely no bearing on how good of a manager he is. All I care about is how he handled it internally. Escobar was suspended and the team held a closed-door meeting after the Vizquel comments during which Vizquel apologized.
|
|
|