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.
8/22-8/25 Red Sox @ Rays Series Thread
|
Post by jmei on Aug 25, 2016 6:51:00 GMT -5
Even if you think Porcello should have faced Longoria, what was the rationale for leaving him in to face two more of the Rays' better hitters after having thrown 113 pitches and already having given up the lead? Ross and Ziegler were warmed up by that point, and ended up having to navigate the inning with an extra baserunner.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 25, 2016 6:53:47 GMT -5
This 4th time through the order thing is interesting, By that criterion, Porcello should have been pulled with two out in the 7th inning, requiring the bullpen to get 3 more outs than it had to in this game. You have to balance the 4th time penalty against the probability of giving up the tying run with another full inning of exposure from the bullpen. Not only that, but then there is the factor that is much more assessable by the coaches in the dugout than by stats on a sheet: The baseball-is-a-marathon-not-a-sprint effect. It is the manager's/coaches' duty to figure out the best way to navigate the team through a 6-month season and hopefully a playoff run. Who is in more need of a break and less need of additional wear and tear, the starter or the bullpen? Which is further complicated because the starter has 4 days to rest until his next action while the bullpen will almost certainly have to provide innings during each of those 4 days. Using the 4th time penalty, any pitcher throwing a no-hitter where batters have reached and not been subsequently erased from the bases before the inning is over has to be pulled from the game before completing it. Now of course, if the score is 8-0 when the 28th batter comes to the plate, who cares? But if the score is 1-0 or 2-0, and say a batter is on base at the time, sorry, but you don't get a chance for the no-hitter. Abad, you're on!! It's late August, the Red Sox are in a heated divisional (and Wild Card) playoff race, and September roster expansion is a week away. If there was ever a time to lean on your bullpen, that time is now.
|
|
|
Post by ancientsoxfogey on Aug 25, 2016 7:21:06 GMT -5
This 4th time through the order thing is interesting, By that criterion, Porcello should have been pulled with two out in the 7th inning, requiring the bullpen to get 3 more outs than it had to in this game. You have to balance the 4th time penalty against the probability of giving up the tying run with another full inning of exposure from the bullpen. Not only that, but then there is the factor that is much more assessable by the coaches in the dugout than by stats on a sheet: The baseball-is-a-marathon-not-a-sprint effect. It is the manager's/coaches' duty to figure out the best way to navigate the team through a 6-month season and hopefully a playoff run. Who is in more need of a break and less need of additional wear and tear, the starter or the bullpen? Which is further complicated because the starter has 4 days to rest until his next action while the bullpen will almost certainly have to provide innings during each of those 4 days. Using the 4th time penalty, any pitcher throwing a no-hitter where batters have reached and not been subsequently erased from the bases before the inning is over has to be pulled from the game before completing it. Now of course, if the score is 8-0 when the 28th batter comes to the plate, who cares? But if the score is 1-0 or 2-0, and say a batter is on base at the time, sorry, but you don't get a chance for the no-hitter. Abad, you're on!! It's late August, the Red Sox are in a heated divisional (and Wild Card) playoff race, and September roster expansion is a week away. If there was ever a time to lean on your bullpen, that time is now. Interesting philosophy. Tell that to the O's, who are lamenting their just-past bad week that took them from feeling pretty good about themselves, to feeling pretty bad, looking up at two teams in the division, and suddenly bringing several teams to them as wild-card contenders. Not that the O's problems are the same as the Sox's, but the importance of not having a bad week is brought to the fore, especially with only 5+weeks left in the season. I agree with you that I'm sure the organization is looking forward to roster expansion. How you best get there without hurting yourself in the standings and wearing out what you consider to be the most weary parts of the roster for both the short term and the longer term (call it the Tarawa effect) is the question.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Aug 25, 2016 7:33:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Aug 25, 2016 7:41:11 GMT -5
The team traded a top prospect for Craig Kimbrel, then doesn't have Craig Kimbrel face Evan Longoria in the 8th inning of a one-run game? I understand that one of the reasons 21st-century relievers put up such absurd numbers is because their roles are so strictly defined. But if you have a reliever who is much better than all of your other relievers, and you're facing a team who has one hitter who is better than all of their other hitters, and it is a one-run game, and it is the 8th inning, and that best hitter is up... You need to save your best pitcher for the ninth in case another pitcher gets the best hitter out? Because if you bring in Kimbrel now, who will face Logan Morrison? Bring on the computer managers.
EDIT: Jmei made a point last week, and the more I think about it the more I agree with it: Farrell manages pitchers the way he would want to be managed. One of the ways that manifests itself is that if a pitcher - especially a starting pitcher - begins an inning, he only comes out if he gets in trouble. It's all reactive managing. A good manager would have said, back when the seventh ended "Longoria is for Kimbrel." But Farrell seems to have this antiquated notion that an inning belongs to the pitcher, rather than to the whole team. So, by getting the top two hitters out, Porcello deserved, in Farrell's eyes, the right to pitch to Longoria. But it shouldn't be about "deserves the right," it should be about matching up the best pitcher for a situation.
For the sake of fairness, Farrell does deserve credit for going to Kimbrel in a tie game on the road - a good decision that most managers don't make. But it makes the above all the more infuriating. If you're willing to use Kimbrel in a situation other than a traditional three-out save, then why not to face the Rays most dangerous hitter when he's the tying run?
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Aug 25, 2016 8:34:24 GMT -5
Exactly that dumb. Esp with Zeigler all warmed up. But hey let's try to milk a guy who was gassed and starting to leave it up. Let THAT guy pitch to a bonafide Red Sox killer who, curiously, likes it up because. Manager's got a hunch he can get him one more time tonight no matter what the data say about effectiveness after 90 pitches and 4th time facing an elite hitter and all that stuff. He had retired the last 11 batters he faced. You must have a different definition of "gassed" than I do. 102 pitches and fourth time through the order. Gassed.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Aug 25, 2016 8:47:20 GMT -5
Gassed shouldn't necessarily even be the subject. What is the best strategy for getting the final four outs they needed without allowing a run? That's it. How well the starter is doing is immaterial. Think of it this way. Longoria was going to be the last pitcher Porcello was going to face, either way, right? Why would you schedule the last batter a starting pitcher would face to be Evan Longoria? I'm paraphrasing, but "he's not tired yet" shouldn't be the only determination of when you take a starter out of the game - but it increasingly seems to be.
EDIT: My bad on this post - apparently Farrell left Porcello in for two batters after the home run. So, no, Longoria obviously wasn't going to be the last batter he faced, no matter how hard I try to butcher the future perfect tense. In my defense I was taking in the Syracuse vs. Scranton game and didn't get home until the Red Sox game was in the 11th. Should've been more thorough with the game logs before my post, though.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Aug 25, 2016 8:59:54 GMT -5
Even if you think Porcello should have faced Longoria, what was the rationale for leaving him in to face two more of the Rays' better hitters after having thrown 113 pitches and already having given up the lead? Ross and Ziegler were warmed up by that point, and ended up having to navigate the inning with an extra baserunner. Maybe the question is a rhetorical one but I am fairly sure that Farrell left him in hoping he could get through the rest of the inning unscathed and the Sox would score in the next half inning to get him his win.
I agree with you, when he gave up the HR Farrell should have pulled him at that point.
Also, not having to do with your comment, I have my fingers crossed for Beni. Hopefully the worst it is is just the sprain that it was originally diagnosed as.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Aug 25, 2016 9:01:57 GMT -5
but I am fairly sure that Farrell left him in hoping he could get through the rest of the inning unscathed and the Sox would score in the next half inning to get him his win.Yes! That's a concise version of what it took me three paragraphs to say. Farrell sees it as Porcello's win, and that's a problem.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Aug 25, 2016 9:03:53 GMT -5
The irrational hate for John Farrell is just ridiculous. He made all the right moves this game. Yes, I know about the times through the order penalty. I also know that our bullpen sucks. Porcello was pitching well and looked like he had another inning in him. He didn't, but you've got to try that every time. Its not irrational at all actually. There are very logical reasons people think he is a bad manager, namely atrocious in game management . I'd like to see a comparative statistical analysis of John Farrell's in-game management to the other MLB managers before declaring him an "atrocious game manager", because on this board, "atrocious in-game manager" means: "He did something I didn't agree with a couple times
|
|
|
Post by patford on Aug 25, 2016 9:09:09 GMT -5
No where to point a finger anywhere but the offense. A number of Sox hitters have been scuffling, particularly JBJ and Bogaerts. Past performance suggests both of them will get hot soon.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Aug 25, 2016 9:11:12 GMT -5
Even if you think Porcello should have faced Longoria, what was the rationale for leaving him in to face two more of the Rays' better hitters after having thrown 113 pitches and already having given up the lead? Ross and Ziegler were warmed up by that point, and ended up having to navigate the inning with an extra baserunner. Porcello, despite giving up a HR, was cruising before that and was not extremely gassed. Ziegler is very poor against lefties. The best option was for Porcello to get passed Duffy and Miller so Ross could pitch to Morrison instead of Ziegler and we could have a righty pitch to Duffy without burning both Ziegler and Ross in a game that was likely to go to extra innings. Edit:Whoops, made a mistake by looking up the wrong Matt Duffy, but my point still mostly stands about situational matchups
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Aug 25, 2016 9:14:07 GMT -5
but I am fairly sure that Farrell left him in hoping he could get through the rest of the inning unscathed and the Sox would score in the next half inning to get him his win.Yes! That's a concise version of what it took me three paragraphs to say. Farrell sees it as Porcello's win, and that's a problem. Yep, fully agree. It always should/has to be about the team.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Aug 25, 2016 9:27:39 GMT -5
If Porcello was pulled before Longoria (who was hitless in 3 ab's vs Rick) & Longo goes deep against the new pitcher, wouldn't some of us be complaining about that?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 25, 2016 9:33:25 GMT -5
If Porcello was pulled before Longoria (who was hitless in 3 ab's vs Rick) & Longo goes deep against the new pitcher, wouldn't some of us be complaining about that? Only people who don't understand baseball.
|
|
|
Post by southcoastsox on Aug 25, 2016 9:33:54 GMT -5
If Porcello was pulled before Longoria (who was hitless in 3 ab's vs Rick) & Longo goes deep against the new pitcher, wouldn't some of us be complaining about that? I don't think it would be justified to blame Farrell in that case. It's much less reasonable to expect a fresh pitcher to give up a HR to the first batter he faces, than a pitcher who's over 100 pitches. I remember being shocked and afraid a few days ago when Farrell left Price in after 7 IP/100 pitches. It was a gamble then and it paid off well. This time it cost the game. It's probably a gamble that shouldn't be made in the future.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Aug 25, 2016 9:47:24 GMT -5
If Porcello was pulled before Longoria (who was hitless in 3 ab's vs Rick) & Longo goes deep against the new pitcher, wouldn't some of us be complaining about that? I don't think it would be justified to blame Farrell in that case. It's much less reasonable to expect a fresh pitcher to give up a HR to the first batter he faces, than a pitcher who's over 100 pitches. I remember being shocked and afraid a few days ago when Farrell left Price in after 7 IP/100 pitches. It was a gamble then and it paid off well. This time it cost the game. It's probably a gamble that shouldn't be made in the future. Remember that the gamble with Price only paid off because Benintendi made what some are calling the best defensive play in all of baseball this season.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 25, 2016 9:54:01 GMT -5
Bad decisions don't become good when they work out. Good decisions don't become bad when they don't work out. I'll always argue that.
|
|
|
Post by monitormichelle on Aug 25, 2016 10:19:12 GMT -5
Benintendi to the DL. No update on his actual injury, though. "Too early to tell" if it's season-ending, per John Farrell.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Aug 25, 2016 10:23:33 GMT -5
“@brianmacp: Farrell: Red Sox doctors are still reviewing the Benintendi MRI. ”Too early to tell“ if the injury is season-ending.”
|
|
|
Post by huskies15 on Aug 25, 2016 10:46:10 GMT -5
I feel like the Red Sox are always slow to diagnose injuries properly. They tell you one thing then weeks later it turns out to be another (usually worse) thing. Really hoping it's not an ACL tear, and something that doesn't affect the beginning of next year.
|
|
|
Post by southcoastsox on Aug 25, 2016 10:50:41 GMT -5
Bad decisions don't become good when they work out. Good decisions don't become bad when they don't work out. I'll always argue that. You said it better than I could.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,928
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 25, 2016 11:01:56 GMT -5
Its not irrational at all actually. There are very logical reasons people think he is a bad manager, namely atrocious in game management . I'd like to see a comparative statistical analysis of John Farrell's in-game management to the other MLB managers before declaring him an "atrocious game manager", because on this board, "atrocious in-game manager" means: "He did something I didn't agree with a couple times Win Efficiency (expected wins based on underlying stats versus actual wins): -10.9 Tampa Bay. I've talked to smart Rays fans (both Rick Wilber, Del's kid, who is a sci-fi writer buddy, and a handful at the SABR conference) who say that Kevin Cash is beyond awful as a game manager. -7.9. Minnesota. Paul Molitor has no managing experience and was just ranked 28th by ESPN.-7.0. Boston. Intelligent and perceptive criticism (by board moderators and a former baseball ops consultant for the team) of specific John Farrell moves throughout the season. -6.9. St. Louis. At ESPN, David Schoenfield recently did a devastating takedown of Mike Matheny's game management skills. -4.9. Washington. Dusty Baker has succeeded because he's an exceptional judge and developer of talent (especially bullpens), but he is a notoriously bad and old-school tactician.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Aug 25, 2016 11:08:25 GMT -5
Red Sox baseball during the day !!!!
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Aug 25, 2016 11:12:31 GMT -5
Even if you think Porcello should have faced Longoria, what was the rationale for leaving him in to face two more of the Rays' better hitters after having thrown 113 pitches and already having given up the lead? Ross and Ziegler were warmed up by that point, and ended up having to navigate the inning with an extra baserunner. The bullpen blows and Porcello has been your best pitcher all year.
|
|
|