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.
Rosenthal speculates on Farrell's job security
|
Post by dirtdog on May 22, 2017 14:53:47 GMT -5
“I don’t know where this is going,” Rosenthal said Sunday night on MLB Network. “It’s an interesting question. If he was fired this week, would I be surprised? No. If he managed the rest of the season and they won the division, would I be surprised? Also no.” Rosenthal pointed to two particular instances — Dustin Pedroia detaching himself from his manager and his teammates after Manny Machado got thrown at, and Drew Pomeranz fighting with Farrell in the dugout after getting taken out of Saturday’s game — as evidence that something is not quite right with the ecosystem in the Sox clubhouse. boston.cbslocal.com/2017/05/22/rosenthal-wouldnt-be-surprised-if-red-sox-fire-john-farrell-this-week/
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on May 22, 2017 16:47:43 GMT -5
Amazing at how Dave Dumbrowski even had managerial depth with Torey Lovullo and will potentially be searching for one come July.
|
|
|
Post by bigpupp on May 22, 2017 17:57:17 GMT -5
TINSTAMD
|
|
|
Post by jmei on May 22, 2017 18:28:48 GMT -5
Amazing at how Dave Dumbrowski even had managerial depth with Torey Lovullo and will potentially be searching for one come July. Please cut out the "Dumbrowski" stuff. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on May 22, 2017 19:19:06 GMT -5
IMO, it is time to part ways. I am inclined to believe that won't happen during this season. JF has had a nice career in the organization. If it does happen, I know he will be professional on the way out. This is the way the managerial ball bounces, they all know it going in.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on May 22, 2017 19:48:10 GMT -5
Amazing at how Dave Dumbrowski even had managerial depth with Torey Lovullo and will potentially be searching for one come July. Please cut out the "Dumbrowski" stuff. Thanks. Please. It's both childish and immature
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on May 22, 2017 22:22:12 GMT -5
I do think that he is on the verge of losing the ball club - it has often played flat and rudderless - in addition to the specific events mentioned in the first post. He was not effective at all after the team clinched last year - taking the foot off of the gas, and the team never found their stride again (the playoffs...ugh).
My preference is that he go soon - maybe it will wake the team up, change things. I fear a long season of mediocrity otherwise. Just my two cents, and my intuition.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on May 22, 2017 22:41:35 GMT -5
Please cut out the "Dumbrowski" stuff. Thanks. Please. It's both childish and immature Apologies. I actually thought that's how his name was spelled for some reason. Wasn't intending to be cute with his name, like when people purposefully misspelled Buchholz. I'll reiterate that it's incredible that Dave Dombrowski had two managers, one of which that seemed to have more respect than the other in the club house and now might have none by June/July.
|
|
|
Post by klostrophobic on May 23, 2017 1:58:11 GMT -5
Please. It's both childish and immature Apologies. I actually thought that's how his name was spelled for some reason. Wasn't intending to be cute with his name, like when people purposefully misspelled Buchholz. I'll reiterate that it's incredible that Dave Dombrowski had two managers, one of which that seemed to have more respect than the other in the club house and now might have none by June/July. Not surprising as Dombrowski doesn't have an ounce of nuance in the way he manages an organization. As for Farrell, he's been seemingly on the hotseat since like 2014, so I'm pretty skeptical that he'll ever be fired at this point.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on May 23, 2017 5:30:41 GMT -5
I'd promote Farrell to a front office job, if he wants it. He seems like a good enough guy to be liked throughout the organization but I just don't think he's a guy that you can count on in tight situations.
Farrell has actually been better with the bullpen management and in game substitutions. Take last Friday night for example in the 9th inning. He put in Vazquez to pinch run for Leon and then he pinch hit Rutledge for Marrero. Vazquez went from first to third on a Rutledge single. Both of those moves worked, yet the Sox still lost.
As for the bullpen, he has used Kimbrel to the best of his ability and has actually used Joe Kelly efficiently too, if not perfectly. Same could be said for Abad and Robby Scott, he has used these 2 guys to the best of their abilities. He does have a unknown infatuation for Hembree, but Hembree is very durable even if he goes from extremely bad to pretty good from game to game. Farrell has also stayed away from Barnes, which is also a good sign because Barnes is unreliable because of his command.
Just when I want to give him credit for so much, he can't figure out how to put a lineup together. Forget Mookie in the leadoff spot which creates a lot of controversy in itself, he also keeps insisting that Pedrioa should be a number 2 hitter with all his ground balls. Either bat him leadoff or drop him way further down the lineup. He has also put Moreland way too high in the lineup throughout most of the year, even though this might not be his fault with the lack of offense so far this year.
Then there is the clubhouse situation in itself. First there is the Manny Machado fiasco, then there's recently the Pomeranz situation. You also got a fulltime DH this year who played almost the full year at first base last year, and he has played a total of 4 innings at first base this year. Farrell has no control over this situation for instance. Hanley will get his way and will be the fulltime DH whether the team needs him to play first base or not. Farrell is a pushover in this regard.
The defense and baserunning has also been very poor to this point and that is on the fundamentals of the coaching staff, most notably at the top in the manager.
Sorry about the long tangent and my overall opinion is that he should go or be promoted to a front office role. While he has shown overall improvement in decision making this year, I still don't trust him, especially in high leverage situations. The fact that now the clubhouse thing is becoming a issue possibly, it should push him to be fired or out of the clubhouse. That and the overall mediocrity of this team should make this a easy decision unless the Sox just start rolling from this point on.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 23, 2017 7:01:02 GMT -5
Amazing at how Dave Dumbrowski even had managerial depth with Torey Lovullo and will potentially be searching for one come July. I liked Lovullo and do think he should have been the manager of the team but I do believe Gary DiSarcina is very well respected around baseball and a managerial candidate. I would have no problems giving him a chance.
|
|
|
Post by soxcentral on May 23, 2017 9:38:20 GMT -5
I doubt they make a move now after all the times he could have been let go, but if it happens this offseason give me Alex Cora as the replacement.
|
|
alnipper
Veteran
Living the dream
Posts: 619
|
Post by alnipper on May 23, 2017 10:07:38 GMT -5
I'm not a fan of JF. I would prefer a manager who can handle a younger team. We all need to keep in mind that a lot of our core players are young. I hope our next manager can create synergy among all the team. I also think having a veteran like Price around could help police Drew P.. Alex Cora would be a good fit in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by congusgambler33 on May 23, 2017 11:45:49 GMT -5
Ahhh. they had the man that should have had the job and let him go to Arizona. He was a proven winner with the Sox taking them from 14 games under 500 to even at one point. at this point my feeling is that they blew it and will flounder with JF all season. DiSarcina is not a proven winner yet at the Major League level, so i guess it is just grabbing at straws. Dombrowski should never had let Lovullo go. Arizona was an average to below average team that is right in the hunt in the NL west. What a surprise!
|
|
|
Post by michael on May 23, 2017 12:58:14 GMT -5
Ahhh. they had the man that should have had the job and let him go to Arizona. He was a proven winner with the Sox taking them from 14 games under 500 to even at one point. at this point my feeling is that they blew it and will flounder with JF all season. DiSarcina is not a proven winner yet at the Major League level, so i guess it is just grabbing at straws. Dombrowski should never had let Lovullo go. Arizona was an average to below average team that is right in the hunt in the NL west. What a surprise! Ah! Are you proposing the Sox should have promoted TL before they lost him? Just like Butch Hobson? Just asking.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 23, 2017 13:27:43 GMT -5
I was going to write out some longer examples, but I don't have time, so I'll summarize for those who are upset about the Red Sox underperforming under Farrell and say the Diamondbacks are overachieving under Lovullo: What specific things does Lovullo deserve credit for with the Diamondbacks? What particular performances can be attributed to him? Similarly, what particular disappointing performances can be pinned on Farrell?
Perhaps it can be summed up as this: What, specifically, is Lovullo doing that Farrell isn't?
It's an honest question I have because I don't quite get what people think the difference is with MLB managers, whose jobs, I'd argue, matter the least of any coach in professional sports so long as they're not making monumentally boneheaded decisions (such as, say, if Farrell were starting Marrero over Bogaerts at shortstop or Young over Betts in right or something). There are very few in-game tactics decisions that matter a ton, unlike, say, what offense to run, what defense to run, and bigger picture substitutions and playing time.
I'm not defending him necessarily - in fact, if someone was in the "the team needs a change and you can't fire all of the players" camp, I can buy that even though I may or may not agree - but I just don't get what people think the difference is from manager to manager.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 23, 2017 14:10:57 GMT -5
The problem is baseball managers probably matter a lot more in ways that can't be seen or quantified which flies in the face of almost everything baseball people and fans are into these days with advance statistics all the rage. To use an extreme example, Bobby Valentine totally lost that team, per Ortiz, right away. It's a long season - chemistry and attitude can carry performances and the manager is supposed to set the proper culture. Not saying Farrell does or doesn't but we don't know
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on May 23, 2017 14:27:17 GMT -5
I was going to write out some longer examples, but I don't have time, so I'll summarize for those who are upset about the Red Sox underperforming under Farrell and say the Diamondbacks are overachieving under Lovullo: What specific things does Lovullo deserve credit for with the Diamondbacks? What particular performances can be attributed to him? Similarly, what particular disappointing performances can be pinned on Farrell? Perhaps it can be summed up as this: What, specifically, is Lovullo doing that Farrell isn't? It's an honest question I have because I don't quite get what people think the difference is with MLB managers, whose jobs, I'd argue, matter the least of any coach in professional sports so long as they're not making monumentally boneheaded decisions (such as, say, if Farrell were starting Marrero over Bogaerts at shortstop or Young over Betts in right or something). There are very few in-game tactics decisions that matter a ton, unlike, say, what offense to run, what defense to run, and bigger picture substitutions and playing time. I'm not defending him necessarily - in fact, if someone was in the "the team needs a change and you can't fire all of the players" camp, I can buy that even though I may or may not agree - but I just don't get what people think the difference is from manager to manager. Well, according to Dombrowski, in-game management is the least important part of being an effective manger so it's hard to quantify what one is doing better than the other. It's quite possible that there wouldn't be a quantifiable difference if one was here over the other, but we do know that it's not working with one whether you want to go by record compared to pre-season expectations, in-game decision making (though i think this year hasn't been egregious), or simply seeing Pedroia choosing to throw his manager and pitcher under a bus or Pomeranz blowing up at the manager for the world to see.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on May 23, 2017 14:54:33 GMT -5
Managers have a bigger role in baseball than most realize. Making out a lineup, for example, involves talking to the players to find out who's OK physically, studying and evaluating scouting reports, reviewing your players' history against the opposing pitcher, ballpark conditions, etc.
In-game decisions involve strategy based upon review of opponents' reactions, strengths of opponents lineups, defensive alignments, etc.
There's also communication with players before, during and after games to constantly teach, especially youngsters, the right way to execute the game plan.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 23, 2017 15:01:57 GMT -5
I was going to write out some longer examples, but I don't have time, so I'll summarize for those who are upset about the Red Sox underperforming under Farrell and say the Diamondbacks are overachieving under Lovullo: What specific things does Lovullo deserve credit for with the Diamondbacks? What particular performances can be attributed to him? Similarly, what particular disappointing performances can be pinned on Farrell? Perhaps it can be summed up as this: What, specifically, is Lovullo doing that Farrell isn't? It's an honest question I have because I don't quite get what people think the difference is with MLB managers, whose jobs, I'd argue, matter the least of any coach in professional sports so long as they're not making monumentally boneheaded decisions (such as, say, if Farrell were starting Marrero over Bogaerts at shortstop or Young over Betts in right or something). There are very few in-game tactics decisions that matter a ton, unlike, say, what offense to run, what defense to run, and bigger picture substitutions and playing time. I'm not defending him necessarily - in fact, if someone was in the "the team needs a change and you can't fire all of the players" camp, I can buy that even though I may or may not agree - but I just don't get what people think the difference is from manager to manager. The people you're asking actually undermine all of the legitimate reasons to fire him. It drives me crazy. But these are also people who expect the Red Sox to win every single game by at least 10 runs to be happy.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 23, 2017 15:25:04 GMT -5
I was going to write out some longer examples, but I don't have time, so I'll summarize for those who are upset about the Red Sox underperforming under Farrell and say the Diamondbacks are overachieving under Lovullo: What specific things does Lovullo deserve credit for with the Diamondbacks? What particular performances can be attributed to him? Similarly, what particular disappointing performances can be pinned on Farrell? Perhaps it can be summed up as this: What, specifically, is Lovullo doing that Farrell isn't? It's an honest question I have because I don't quite get what people think the difference is with MLB managers, whose jobs, I'd argue, matter the least of any coach in professional sports so long as they're not making monumentally boneheaded decisions (such as, say, if Farrell were starting Marrero over Bogaerts at shortstop or Young over Betts in right or something). There are very few in-game tactics decisions that matter a ton, unlike, say, what offense to run, what defense to run, and bigger picture substitutions and playing time. I'm not defending him necessarily - in fact, if someone was in the "the team needs a change and you can't fire all of the players" camp, I can buy that even though I may or may not agree - but I just don't get what people think the difference is from manager to manager. The people you're asking actually undermine all of the legitimate reasons to fire him. It drives me crazy. But these are also people who expect the Red Sox to win every single game by at least 10 runs to be happy. Like what
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 23, 2017 16:36:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jmei on May 23, 2017 17:01:13 GMT -5
In terms of in-game strategy, I actually think Farrell has been pretty good this year. He's shown genuine flexibility about using the guy who is by far his best reliever in non-traditional situations (four-out saves, even a six-out save, tied game on the road, etc.) and his bullpen usage in general has been solid (e.g., keeping guys like Scott and Abad in LOOGY roles), even if it still annoys me often enough (he still hews too closely to the middle inning-setup man-closer orthodoxy, but just about every manager does, and there's something to be said about giving relievers predictable roles).
|
|
|
Post by dnfl333 on May 23, 2017 18:23:56 GMT -5
Amazing at how Dave Dumbrowski even had managerial depth with Torey Lovullo and will potentially be searching for one come July. Henry is behind this, him and werner.. No way DD is this ignorant about retaining a sub .500 Manager and all the issues surrounding the clubhouse.. Another issue I have with Farrell, once a player or pitcher begins to slump there out. See Bradley and most every reliever. Same at 3B, a revolving door. Once a guy makes an error there out. Time to get Farrell out!
|
|
|
Post by dnfl333 on May 23, 2017 19:05:59 GMT -5
I was going to write out some longer examples, but I don't have time, so I'll summarize for those who are upset about the Red Sox underperforming under Farrell and say the Diamondbacks are overachieving under Lovullo: What specific things does Lovullo deserve credit for with the Diamondbacks? What particular performances can be attributed to him? Similarly, what particular disappointing performances can be pinned on Farrell? Perhaps it can be summed up as this: What, specifically, is Lovullo doing that Farrell isn't? It's an honest question I have because I don't quite get what people think the difference is with MLB managers, whose jobs, I'd argue, matter the least of any coach in professional sports so long as they're not making monumentally boneheaded decisions (such as, say, if Farrell were starting Marrero over Bogaerts at shortstop or Young over Betts in right or something). There are very few in-game tactics decisions that matter a ton, unlike, say, what offense to run, what defense to run, and bigger picture substitutions and playing time. I'm not defending him necessarily - in fact, if someone was in the "the team needs a change and you can't fire all of the players" camp, I can buy that even though I may or may not agree - but I just don't get what people think the difference is from manager to manager. Lovullo more than likely brings a more calm presence over the players. It is all about working with individuals to get them to concentrate more on the mental aspect of the game. To be ready at all times. How many times do we hear ex-players talk about the mental fatigue and such. He works better with each player that ultimately forms a Team that is on the same page game in and game out. It could be that simple. Listen to Farrell on Dale & Holley on EEI and before each radio broadcast. Then draw your own conclusion. When Farrell speaks its all about why a player isn't doing this or doing that. The blame is always on the player in not so many words with Farrell. Its time to cut bait!
|
|
|