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.
John Farrell: To fire or not to fire...
|
Post by grandsalami on Aug 19, 2016 10:18:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by patford on Aug 19, 2016 12:57:16 GMT -5
The rational for not starting the 8th with Ziegler was sound. The three batters faced by Tazawa "own" Ziegler. As Barnes had to throw multiple inning when E-Rod came up lame the Sox should have called up an arm from AAA, particularly with the cluster of games the Sox are facing. Tazawa can't possibly be right. They should shut him down for at least two weeks and not bring him back unless their arm strength tests show him to be at full strength.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Aug 19, 2016 13:08:13 GMT -5
I think the hiring of JF was sound, familiar with Boston, had success with the pitchers, had some major league experience as a manager -- although not necessarily W/L successful.
But he's just made countless errors that casual fans blush at. There are better men to lead this organization from his position, one of them is sitting beside him. I'd make the change.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Aug 19, 2016 22:30:30 GMT -5
The rational for not starting the 8th with Ziegler was sound. The three batters faced by Tazawa "own" Ziegler. As Barnes had to throw multiple inning when E-Rod came up lame the Sox should have called up an arm from AAA, particularly with the cluster of games the Sox are facing. Tazawa can't possibly be right. They should shut him down for at least two weeks and not bring him back unless their arm strength tests show him to be at full strength. I don't see how it could be sound. I can't get at the article but Kinsler has had 11 at bats in 6 years vs Zeigler. Aybar is batting .200 vs Zeigler though only 10 at bats. Taz has been a dumpster for quite a while now. Just wondering; when did you come to the conclusion that Taz wasn't right? You thought he was okay before yesterday's game?
If you didn't think he was okay then how could it be in anyway acceptable to use him in a one run game in the 8th?
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Aug 20, 2016 7:56:27 GMT -5
Sheesh, what is wrong with Alex Speier? Looking at some talking points from his article...
So... are we meant to believe that Dombrowski told Farrell "hey, I got you a new 8th inning guy, his name is Abad"? Or worse, Dombrowski asked Farrell which pitcher he should go out and acquire for the 8th inning? Or what does this mean?
Could you prepare the team by telling them to not ****ing bunt all the time instead?
Oh wow, Farrell managed to commit to a guy hitting .500 as his primary catcher when the alternative was... Ryan Hanigan? What a feat. He moved Mookie down in the order 3 or 4 months after it became completely obvious that that was the right thing to do? Amazing! Wish I got judged by such standards at my workplace.
Um, LOL? The Red Sox have several players massively outperforming their projections this year (Ortiz and Leon for everyone, Wright and JBJ for the non-optimists, etc.) yet overall they are just doing what was expected (rather than running away with the division as they could be). Meanwhile you could do this analysis for Farrell's entire managerial career and it would reflect very poorly on him.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Aug 20, 2016 8:56:14 GMT -5
Sheesh, what is wrong with Alex Speier? Looking at some talking points from his article... So... are we meant to believe that Dombrowski told Farrell "hey, I got you a new 8th inning guy, his name is Abad"? Or worse, Dombrowski asked Farrell which pitcher he should go out and acquire for the 8th inning? Or what does this mean? Could you prepare the team by telling them to not ****ing bunt all the time instead? Oh wow, Farrell managed to commit to a guy hitting .500 as his primary catcher when the alternative was... Ryan Hanigan? What a feat. He moved Mookie down in the order 3 or 4 months after it became completely obvious that that was the right thing to do? Amazing! Wish I got judged by such standards at my workplace. Um, LOL? The Red Sox have several players massively outperforming their projections this year (Ortiz and Leon for everyone, Wright and JBJ for the non-optimists, etc.) yet overall they are just doing what was expected (rather than running away with the division as they could be). Meanwhile you could do this analysis for Farrell's entire managerial career and it would reflect very poorly on him. Are you saying that a team beat writer might not be objective about the manager of the team which said beat writer covers? Has that ever happened before in the 140 years since the founding on the National League?
|
|
|
Post by ancientsoxfogey on Aug 20, 2016 9:30:05 GMT -5
None of the poll options really fit my feelings, so I won't vote.
But it's clear that John Farrell isn't getting fired during this season. The organization isn't going to rock the boat right now regardless of what happens. Has it ever happened that a manager in a playoff race was fired during the last quarter of the season? So those on the board begging for Farrell's departure might as well grin/grit your teeth and bear it.
The team will let the season play out and make its decision after the final game, whenever that occurs.
|
|
|
Post by geostorm on Aug 20, 2016 10:56:36 GMT -5
None of the poll options really fit my feelings, so I won't vote. But it's clear that John Farrell isn't getting fired during this season. The organization isn't going to rock the boat right now regardless of what happens. Has it ever happened that a manager in a playoff race was fired during the last quarter of the season? So those on the board begging for Farrell's departure might as well grin/grit your teeth and bear it. The team will let the season play out and make its decision after the final game, whenever that occurs. Agreed..."...Lou Lamoriello's not walking through that door!..."...
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,911
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 16, 2016 5:47:16 GMT -5
Yeah, I put this in the first thread that I thought was appropriate in any way. I've already expressed my belief that JF has given Xander way too little rest.
JBJ missed 3 games at the end of May and the beginning of June for paternity leave. I've never had a baby, but I'm guessing that flying home, dealing with a newborn, and flying back isn't restful.
JBJ has had 2 days off. Two. April 9 and August 13. Plus the All-Star break, of course.
I've divided his season into hot and cold streaks. Here's his EqA and length of each. First, the hot streaks.
.410, 29 G -- baby --- .399, 8 G .435, 7 G, started a week after the ASB .308, 7 G .300, 13 G before last night
How about his cold streaks?
.211, 16 G (start of season) .246, 17 G (includes baby) .231, 17 G .178, 13 G .156, 13 G
(Those slumps, BTW, are very typical in length for streaky players.)
Does or doesn't this look like a guy who is wearing down, with the infant at home probably contributing? His cold streaks, once he got it going in the first place, have gotten worse and worse. He hasn't been able to sustain his hot streaks very long since he acquired the infant, and the last two have been ordinary instead of insanely hot.
If I'm a manager and I've got a player with a newborn at home, I'm going to assume he's not getting as much sleep as he'd like to, and I'm looking to get him days off in a day game after a night game at home, and so on.
I'm going to do the R/L and H/A splits for each of these streaks at some point.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 16, 2016 9:51:45 GMT -5
Well, all the "Fire Farrell" folks, me included, have to credit him for giving Hanley the "OK, hit a bomb" signal after it went to 3-1 last night.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,911
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 16, 2016 11:08:46 GMT -5
Well, all the "Fire Farrell" folks, me included, have to credit him for giving Hanley the "OK, hit a bomb" signal after it went to 3-1 last night. Seriously, I do think JF bring positives to the team. Which is to say, I think the manager deserves some credit when the players collectively outperform projections. There are areas where the team is clearly well coached, like stealing and baserunning. Defensive positioning seems sound. The JF weaknesses are well-defined and, in theory, teachable. I think part of the problem is that DDo (by his own testimony, IIRC) is less of a watchdog than Theo and Cherington were. He is less fond of telling the manager "we here in the F.O. thought X was stupid" and "really, dude, stop doing X." But the analytics department can't be unaware of the Win Efficiency and a lot of the other objective evidence I've been talking about.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 16, 2016 11:39:25 GMT -5
Well, all the "Fire Farrell" folks, me included, have to credit him for giving Hanley the "OK, hit a bomb" signal after it went to 3-1 last night. Seriously, I do think JF bring positives to the team. Which is to say, I think the manager deserves some credit when the players collectively outperform projections. There are areas where the team is clearly well coached, like stealing and baserunning. Defensive positioning seems sound. The JF weaknesses are well-defined and, in theory, teachable. I think part of the problem is that DDo (by his own testimony, IIRC) is less of a watchdog than Theo and Cherington were. He is less fond of telling the manager "we here in the F.O. thought X was stupid" and "really, dude, stop doing X." But the analytics department can't be unaware of the Win Efficiency and a lot of the other objective evidence I've been talking about.
I can't imagine how annoying it is (or was for you) to know you're right about something and get completely ignored over and over again. It seems like every once in awhile, Farrell changes his behavior pretty dramatically before falling back into his old habits. I have to believe that those are the times that someone tells him to actually listen to the stat guys. It's been annoying to me all year that no one convinced him how good Robbie Ross has been and that he should have been getting higher leverage innings when the bullpen was a complete mess. Or earlier in the year when Farrell was using or warming Tazawa in 75% of the games, some of those appearances could have been give to Ross when he was pitching 2 days in 2 weeks.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,911
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 16, 2016 16:37:21 GMT -5
Seriously, I do think JF bring positives to the team. Which is to say, I think the manager deserves some credit when the players collectively outperform projections. There are areas where the team is clearly well coached, like stealing and baserunning. Defensive positioning seems sound. The JF weaknesses are well-defined and, in theory, teachable. I think part of the problem is that DDo (by his own testimony, IIRC) is less of a watchdog than Theo and Cherington were. He is less fond of telling the manager "we here in the F.O. thought X was stupid" and "really, dude, stop doing X." But the analytics department can't be unaware of the Win Efficiency and a lot of the other objective evidence I've been talking about.
I can't imagine how annoying it is (or was for you) to know you're right about something and get completely ignored over and over again. It seems like every once in awhile, Farrell changes his behavior pretty dramatically before falling back into his old habits. I have to believe that those are the times that someone tells him to actually listen to the stat guys. It's been annoying to me all year that no one convinced him how good Robbie Ross has been and that he should have been getting higher leverage innings when the bullpen was a complete mess. Or earlier in the year when Farrell was using or warming Tazawa in 75% of the games, some of those appearances could have been give to Ross when he was pitching 2 days in 2 weeks. Just like Joni Mitchell in the famous song, I saw it both ways, as I think I've alluded to. In '05, when Jed Hoyer was the guy who took all of the analytic data from all sources and met with Tito, the advice was taken very regularly, with often exciting results. And then when Jed was promoted and someone else had that job, it was taken much less often, and in fact my recommendations that acknowledged player psychology were, as I found out from Shaughnessy's book with Tito, being trumped (can we still use that word)? I remember how disappointed I was when I was told that Tito had reached a breaking point with all the lineup advice and that I should start doing something else ... and the thing he objected to, the last straw for him, was the recommendation that Lowell should sit against Chien-Ming Wang, when my advice for that series was to maybe platoon at C and SS, but "I don't think anyone else is going to want to sit against the Yankees." Getting the manager to be saber-smart has got to be difficult. Jed Hoyer was brilliant at it. It's a shame that talent is now being wasted with Maddon, who is so saber-friendly. I have no idea whose job it is with the current Sox.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Sept 17, 2016 11:29:50 GMT -5
I can't imagine how annoying it is (or was for you) to know you're right about something and get completely ignored over and over again. It seems like every once in awhile, Farrell changes his behavior pretty dramatically before falling back into his old habits. I have to believe that those are the times that someone tells him to actually listen to the stat guys. It's been annoying to me all year that no one convinced him how good Robbie Ross has been and that he should have been getting higher leverage innings when the bullpen was a complete mess. Or earlier in the year when Farrell was using or warming Tazawa in 75% of the games, some of those appearances could have been give to Ross when he was pitching 2 days in 2 weeks. Just like Joni Mitchell in the famous song, I saw it both ways, as I think I've alluded to. In '05, when Jed Hoyer was the guy who took all of the analytic data from all sources and met with Tito, the advice was taken very regularly, with often exciting results. And then when Jed was promoted and someone else had that job, it was taken much less often, and in fact my recommendations that acknowledged player psychology were, as I found out from Shaughnessy's book with Tito, being trumped (can we still use that word)? I remember how disappointed I was when I was told that Tito had reached a breaking point with all the lineup advice and that I should start doing something else ... and the thing he objected to, the last straw for him, was the recommendation that Lowell should sit against Chien-Ming Wang, when my advice for that series was to maybe platoon at C and SS, but "I don't think anyone else is going to want to sit against the Yankees." Getting the manager to be saber-smart has got to be difficult. Jed Hoyer was brilliant at it. It's a shame that talent is now being wasted with Maddon, who is so saber-friendly. I have no idea whose job it is with the current Sox. My perception (and I mean strictly perception) is that Farrell gets too much credit for the success of the base running in terms of steals. He should get some credit but not that much for it. Overall my perception of Farrell's overall base running coaching has been sub-par to poor. But again just a perception.--- They get steals but there are athletes on this team and not all steals are signaled by the coach. Sure some credit is given for giving the green light but that's not that astute, is it? Anyhow, no pro manager is "all bad" or "never did a thing right." But kudos shouldn't be given just because the manager isn't awful at something.
In regards to the negatives, his decision with Wright was an enormous blunder vs not using Pomeranz. And I just thought we have been caught (not outright stealing) way too much between 1st and 2nd and 2nd and 3rd or caught at 3rd because or overall poor decision on the base paths in which the team philosophy of being aggressive went way too far. Hanley blowing past stop signs maybe more than once or twice while doing it last year (not just Hanley but that's an example. It shouldn't be "cool" to blow past stop signs but I get the feeling the team/players/even media thinks it is cool when the player has done it the last couple of years).
IMO it's okay for a Holt try to steal home as a surprise - that's aggressive maybe low chance but it's the surprise. Sure go for it. But other times this year I thought blunders came when they shouldn't even be tried. And I just don't get the feeling that JF discourages it. Also, how often have we hit and run? How many times should we for example have used Pedey as hit and run while he was hitting into so many double-plays? But the Wright blunder vs Pomeranz is part of the overall poor decision making coming from the coach. I'd say he has been sub-par to poor managing the running game overall. It's the athletes and the brains of a guy like Pedey also deserve some of the credit.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,911
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 17, 2016 11:43:40 GMT -5
Just like Joni Mitchell in the famous song, I saw it both ways, as I think I've alluded to. In '05, when Jed Hoyer was the guy who took all of the analytic data from all sources and met with Tito, the advice was taken very regularly, with often exciting results. And then when Jed was promoted and someone else had that job, it was taken much less often, and in fact my recommendations that acknowledged player psychology were, as I found out from Shaughnessy's book with Tito, being trumped (can we still use that word)? I remember how disappointed I was when I was told that Tito had reached a breaking point with all the lineup advice and that I should start doing something else ... and the thing he objected to, the last straw for him, was the recommendation that Lowell should sit against Chien-Ming Wang, when my advice for that series was to maybe platoon at C and SS, but "I don't think anyone else is going to want to sit against the Yankees." Getting the manager to be saber-smart has got to be difficult. Jed Hoyer was brilliant at it. It's a shame that talent is now being wasted with Maddon, who is so saber-friendly. I have no idea whose job it is with the current Sox. My perception (and I mean strictly perception) is that Farrell gets too much credit for the success of the base running in terms of steals. He should get some credit but not that much for it. Overall my perception of Farrell's overall base running coaching has been sub-par to poor. But again just a perception.--- They get steals but there are athletes on this team and not all steals are signaled by the coach. Sure some credit is given for giving the green light but that's not that astute, is it? Anyhow, no pro manager is "all bad" or "never did a thing right." But kudos shouldn't be given just because the manager isn't awful at something.
In regards to the negatives, his decision with Wright was an enormous blunder vs not using Pomeranz. And I just thought we have been caught (not outright stealing) way too much between 1st and 2nd and 2nd and 3rd or caught at 3rd because or overall poor decision on the base paths in which the team philosophy of being aggressive went way too far. Hanley blowing past stop signs maybe more than once or twice while doing it last year (not just Hanley but that's an example. It shouldn't be "cool" to blow past stop signs but I get the feeling the team/players/even media thinks it is cool when the player has done it the last couple of years).
IMO it's okay for a Holt try to steal home as a surprise - that's aggressive maybe low chance but it's the surprise. Sure go for it. But other times this year I thought blunders came when they shouldn't even be tried. And I just don't get the feeling that JF discourages it. Also, how often have we hit and run? How many times should we for example have used Pedey as hit and run while he was hitting into so many double-plays? But the Wright blunder vs Pomeranz is part of the overall poor decision making coming from the coach. I'd say he has been sub-par to poor managing the running game overall. It's the athletes and the brains of a guy like Pedey also deserve some of the credit.
The Sox are the 3rd best team in MLB for advancing on hits (net runs, so getting thrown out counts negative) and the 3rd best for advancing on air outs. They are 10th in SB runs and 22nd in advancing on WP, PB, and other miscellany. They are 29th in advancing on ground outs, but a big part of that is because the team correctly tries to get hits rather than "move the runner over."
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Sept 17, 2016 13:47:36 GMT -5
My perception (and I mean strictly perception) is that Farrell gets too much credit for the success of the base running in terms of steals. He should get some credit but not that much for it. Overall my perception of Farrell's overall base running coaching has been sub-par to poor. But again just a perception.--- They get steals but there are athletes on this team and not all steals are signaled by the coach. Sure some credit is given for giving the green light but that's not that astute, is it? Anyhow, no pro manager is "all bad" or "never did a thing right." But kudos shouldn't be given just because the manager isn't awful at something.
In regards to the negatives, his decision with Wright was an enormous blunder vs not using Pomeranz. And I just thought we have been caught (not outright stealing) way too much between 1st and 2nd and 2nd and 3rd or caught at 3rd because or overall poor decision on the base paths in which the team philosophy of being aggressive went way too far. Hanley blowing past stop signs maybe more than once or twice while doing it last year (not just Hanley but that's an example. It shouldn't be "cool" to blow past stop signs but I get the feeling the team/players/even media thinks it is cool when the player has done it the last couple of years).
IMO it's okay for a Holt try to steal home as a surprise - that's aggressive maybe low chance but it's the surprise. Sure go for it. But other times this year I thought blunders came when they shouldn't even be tried. And I just don't get the feeling that JF discourages it. Also, how often have we hit and run? How many times should we for example have used Pedey as hit and run while he was hitting into so many double-plays? But the Wright blunder vs Pomeranz is part of the overall poor decision making coming from the coach. I'd say he has been sub-par to poor managing the running game overall. It's the athletes and the brains of a guy like Pedey also deserve some of the credit.
The Sox are the 3rd best team in MLB for advancing on hits (net runs, so getting thrown out counts negative) and the 3rd best for advancing on air outs. They are 10th in SB runs and 22nd in advancing on WP, PB, and other miscellany. They are 29th in advancing on ground outs, but a big part of that is because the team correctly tries to get hits rather than "move the runner over." How is advancing from 1st to 3rd for example mean that it's a well coached running team and not an extremely good athletic team? They do have very, very, very good athletes.
Why would as much credit be given for a deep fly ball to rf in which a runner advances from 2nd to 3rd vs a bonehead decision of trying to get from 2nd to 3rd on a ground ball to the shortstop? One play is a decision which didn't take much thought, vs the other which is a bonehead decision. It's not the 50% success rate of getting to 3rd in this example as a meaningful relevant stat. Instead which is relevant imo, is that one time a challenging decision was needed to be made, the resulting decision was incredibly dumb. It's oaky once or twice for incredibly dumb decisions, but again my percpetion was that we have made too many incredibly dumb ones.
My perception has been when there is a tougher decision, this team makes some incredibly dumb running decisions and the examples I gave of several times of them running through stop signs, it is indicative of what I perceive as a poor (without consequences for running through the signs) thought process. And ofc the manager making the decision with even someone like Wright (when basic logic is so clear Pomeranz would have been the far better choice in a close game in which the manager felt he needed the run) is even more of an indication that the manager is sloppy with his managing the base paths.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Sept 22, 2016 7:31:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by bigpupp on Sept 22, 2016 8:55:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Sept 22, 2016 9:30:16 GMT -5
It's Francona and it should be unanimous. He's the best manager and he's having the best season and he has a team good enough that he should get credit for it. The Andrew Miller usage alone should win it for him.
|
|
|
Post by Coreno on Sept 22, 2016 11:57:53 GMT -5
What a hot take by that writer to list the 3 division leaders as having the inside track at manager of the year.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Sept 22, 2016 12:05:42 GMT -5
It's Francona and it should be unanimous. He's the best manager and he's having the best season and he has a team good enough that he should get credit for it. The Andrew Miller usage alone should win it for him. I sort of agree, but Banister is also doing a flat out tremendous job in Texas. That team should be .500, no way they should have the best record in the AL. As for Farrell, even the John Farrell Intangibles and Finger Food Appreciation Society® doesn't think he should win this year. He has done a very good job though and his team looks damn ready for the post-season run.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2016 13:24:58 GMT -5
I saw that earlier and would have posted it if you hadn't beaten me to it. This article proves what an absolute joke the Manager of the Year awards are. Basically, the award is decided by a simple formula: team wins in current year subtracted by wins in previous year. The Red Sox are going to win about 15-16 more games than last year. It must be all Farrell's doing, right?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 22, 2016 13:54:13 GMT -5
I saw that earlier and would have posted it if you hadn't beaten me to it. This article proves what an absolute joke the Manager of the Year awards are. Basically, the award is decided by a simple formula: team wins in current year subtracted by wins in previous year. The Red Sox are going to win about 15-16 more games than last year. It must be all Farrell's doing, right? Right. He had a neutral effect on the team the last two years and this year decided to try.
|
|
|
Post by bigpupp on Sept 22, 2016 13:56:26 GMT -5
I saw that earlier and would have posted it if you hadn't beaten me to it. This article proves what an absolute joke the Manager of the Year awards are. Basically, the award is decided by a simple formula: team wins in current year subtracted by wins in previous year. The Red Sox are going to win about 15-16 more games than last year. It must be all Farrell's doing, right? Right. But this isn't any different than what we do on this board. We watch Farrell every day so we think he's a bad manager. We don't watch the other managers, but because their team wins we assume they must be good managers. Just take Francona for example. I couldn't go a series without seeing the term "Francoma" used, but now that he's winning with the Indians everyone here thinks he walks on water.
|
|
|
Post by ryan24 on Sept 22, 2016 14:54:02 GMT -5
I have read it more than once over the last 40 plus years that all teams are guaranteed to win 50 and lose 50. What happens with the 62 remaining decides the season. Injuries and career years for players figure into the results of those 62. With the talent the sox does hehave it seems they should have won 5 or 6 more games at this stage. Is he a better mgr because Dave picked up a pitcher who has won 16 games this year? Is he a better mgr because Rick had the light come on and has a career year and maybe has turned the corner into an elite pitcher? He now has a proven power arm to close that we haven't had since pap? Resting players in the field and mgt of the bp has been poor in general. Taz got tired out and ross appears to have been underused. Now injuries have played a part, but. Who could you get who would do a better job? It is a short list probably. Over the last month the team has played much better. Is it because they got healthy? Because they now have an expanded roster? Beni and Leon gave them a jump start? They are catching their second wind? IMHO all valid reasons. There is no data to support it, but I wonder if Farrell was let go, how fast would he be offered another job? I think it will be very interesting to see what Dave does this winter with his coaching staff if anything. Butter, chilli, and tory I am sure all stay. But is Tory offered or seeks a mgr job with another team? Bannister stays but in what capacity? Will Farrell fight any changes? Does willis stay? I know he has worked with some top flight pitchers. But pitching has been a weak spot. Development of young pitchers has been spotty at best. Farrell probably stays for next year. But, can we do better? Yes! But we will not get terry back, no maddon,no buck, so we probably need to be careful of what we wish for. Right now we are in 1st with a good chance to get to the ws.
|
|
|