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.
|
Post by voiceofreason on Oct 10, 2017 8:06:44 GMT -5
I am not a JF fan and he isnt a great in game mgr IMO, but he isnt one of the many players who either under performed or was injured for a good part of the season. Yet the Sox still won the division. How many of you would have predicted the Sox would win the division if you saw the final stats for each player but not the won/loss record? Statistically very few had a good season and yes there were a few great seasons but the bad or sub par greatly out weighed the good. This team really couldnt hit any worse that they did. I do expect a big bounce back season next year for the whole team and that includes JF. What they need is a big bat in the middle so go get one. Hosmer? The Sox will score 100 more runs next year and the rotation will live up to expectations. My optimism starts now!!
|
|
|
Post by daltonjones on Oct 10, 2017 8:08:08 GMT -5
Farrell loses a few games every year through overthinking and persistent bad luck, in this division that really hurts. It is much harder to quantify how many games we win by keeping the established veterans happy.
The Theo dreams of building a dynasty are long gone. We have little money, little on the farm, and are clearly over-matched by Houston, Cleveland, NYY, LAD... Kinda stuck with the old Sullivan-Gorman strategy of try to stagger to the playoffs and hope to get red hot in October for a few years.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 10, 2017 8:17:40 GMT -5
The Theo dreams of building a dynasty are long gone. We have little money, little on the farm, and are clearly over-matched by Houston, Cleveland, NYY, LAD... Kinda stuck with the old Sullivan-Gorman strategy of try to stagger to the playoffs and hope to get red hot in October for a few years. So I think you've touched on an important point. From maybe 2003 to 2009, the Red Sox were baseball's best run organization, and I think we sort of took it for granted. They drafted well in the early part of that stretch, made generally deft moves at the major league level, and really took advantage of the fact that there were teams that were just dumb in the way that teams aren't dumb anymore. The Red Sox had a Hall of Fame GM and Hall of Fame manager in place, and they punted it. Now they are a decent team, with a lot of resources, and a very talented young core. But... it's hard to see how they catch up to Cleveland and Houston right now. They emptied the farm, shortened their window of opportunity, and ended up a very good but not championship caliber team. And I think we're all a little uneasy about it.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Oct 10, 2017 8:25:25 GMT -5
The Theo dreams of building a dynasty are long gone. We have little money, little on the farm, and are clearly over-matched by Houston, Cleveland, NYY, LAD... Kinda stuck with the old Sullivan-Gorman strategy of try to stagger to the playoffs and hope to get red hot in October for a few years. So I think you've touched on an important point. From maybe 2003 to 2009, the Red Sox were baseball's best run organization, and I think we sort of took it for granted. They drafted well in the early part of that stretch, made generally deft moves at the major league level, and really took advantage of the fact that there were teams that were just dumb in the way that teams aren't dumb anymore. The Red Sox had a Hall of Fame GM and Hall of Fame manager in place, and they punted it. Now they are a decent team, with a lot of resources, and a very talented young core. But... it's hard to see how they catch up to Cleveland and Houston right now. They emptied the farm, shortened their window of opportunity, and ended up a very good but not championship caliber team. And I think we're all a little uneasy about it. Hou and CHC are where they are because they sucked (to the point of getting top 5 picks) for multiple years in a row..... That won't ever happen in BOS
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 10, 2017 8:32:34 GMT -5
So I think you've touched on an important point. From maybe 2003 to 2009, the Red Sox were baseball's best run organization, and I think we sort of took it for granted. They drafted well in the early part of that stretch, made generally deft moves at the major league level, and really took advantage of the fact that there were teams that were just dumb in the way that teams aren't dumb anymore. The Red Sox had a Hall of Fame GM and Hall of Fame manager in place, and they punted it. Now they are a decent team, with a lot of resources, and a very talented young core. But... it's hard to see how they catch up to Cleveland and Houston right now. They emptied the farm, shortened their window of opportunity, and ended up a very good but not championship caliber team. And I think we're all a little uneasy about it. Hou and CHC are where they are because they sucked (to the point of getting top 5 picks) for multiple years in a row..... That won't ever happen in BOS That's bullplop. www.baseball-reference.com/draft/?team_ID=CHC&draft_round=1&draft_type=junreg&query_type=franch_roundwww.baseball-reference.com/draft/?team_ID=HOU&draft_type=junreg&query_type=franch_roundThe Astros had two top five picks as key contributors - Bregman and Correa. And Correa was a highly controversial pick at the time, so the Astros deserve a LOT of credit for hitting on him at #1. The Cubs had one in Kris Bryant (who, again - taking him over Jon Gray was controversial, though I agreed with it). Two if you count Schwarber, which you shouldn't. The Astros and Cubs are in the position they're in because they're very, very good evaporators of talent.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Oct 10, 2017 8:43:00 GMT -5
Will he get fired? I voted that he will. I can't imagine that management will 1) keep Farrell around and 2) stay under the luxury tax limit after the Red Sox bowed out for the 2nd straight season, had a bunch of brushfires that made the team look bad, and looked clearly inferior to the Astros, Indians, and Yankees (even with the empty division title), too, by season's end.This just isn't true at all (please check their August / September record). You have had this narrative all year and it isn't anymore true because they lost in the ALDS. The Indians and Astros were slightly better and the Yankees were worse. As far as Farrell, I don't think he will be back. I can't really say whether that is good or not, but I think a change in leadership should probably occur.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Oct 10, 2017 8:54:07 GMT -5
The Theo dreams of building a dynasty are long gone. We have little money, little on the farm, and are clearly over-matched by Houston, Cleveland, NYY, LAD... Kinda stuck with the old Sullivan-Gorman strategy of try to stagger to the playoffs and hope to get red hot in October for a few years. So I think you've touched on an important point. From maybe 2003 to 2009, the Red Sox were baseball's best run organization, and I think we sort of took it for granted. They drafted well in the early part of that stretch, made generally deft moves at the major league level, and really took advantage of the fact that there were teams that were just dumb in the way that teams aren't dumb anymore. The Red Sox had a Hall of Fame GM and Hall of Fame manager in place, and they punted it. Now they are a decent team, with a lot of resources, and a very talented young core. But... it's hard to see how they catch up to Cleveland and Houston right now. They emptied the farm, shortened their window of opportunity, and ended up a very good but not championship caliber team. And I think we're all a little uneasy about it. I think we need to take a pause on this kind of equating the current regime with Theo et al. They had a great nucleus also. And organizations don't normally stay on top for 15 years (Pats are exception, but that is football). When you are on top, there is no place to go but down. You also can't predict how well other teams are going to progress. Agreed that is a short term strategy that was adopted by DD, but it is strange to have people argue against an organizational philosophy that won 2 division titles, for the first time ever (correct?). Some of this is just Theo binky. If we didn't have the unanticipated (by all) power outage, I just don't think we would be having this conversation.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,826
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Oct 10, 2017 9:12:21 GMT -5
The Theo dreams of building a dynasty are long gone. We have little money, little on the farm, and are clearly over-matched by Houston, Cleveland, NYY, LAD... Kinda stuck with the old Sullivan-Gorman strategy of try to stagger to the playoffs and hope to get red hot in October for a few years. So I think you've touched on an important point. From maybe 2003 to 2009, the Red Sox were baseball's best run organization, and I think we sort of took it for granted. They drafted well in the early part of that stretch, made generally deft moves at the major league level, and really took advantage of the fact that there were teams that were just dumb in the way that teams aren't dumb anymore. The Red Sox had a Hall of Fame GM and Hall of Fame manager in place, and they punted it. Now they are a decent team, with a lot of resources, and a very talented young core. But... it's hard to see how they catch up to Cleveland and Houston right now. They emptied the farm, shortened their window of opportunity, and ended up a very good but not championship caliber team. And I think we're all a little uneasy about it. I could not have said it better. When we over reacted in 2009, and lost Theo and Tito....things went south and we have never fully recovered. The owners, I believe, screwed up a very good thing.
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Oct 10, 2017 9:23:53 GMT -5
Farrell will not be managing the Red Sox next year. It is simply time for a change - and that is more important than any of the factors, plus or minus, that I or anyone else have/can/will raise.
Farrell, I think, lost his ability to inspire this particular group of players beyond what they've accomplished - which is admittedly a lot. There is a window of effectiveness - and that is now gone. We saw it happen with Tito.
To get to the next level, a change is necessary...and of course this is not the only change needed.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Oct 10, 2017 9:31:14 GMT -5
The Theo dreams of building a dynasty are long gone. We have little money, little on the farm, and are clearly over-matched by Houston, Cleveland, NYY, LAD... Kinda stuck with the old Sullivan-Gorman strategy of try to stagger to the playoffs and hope to get red hot in October for a few years. So I think you've touched on an important point. From maybe 2003 to 2009, the Red Sox were baseball's best run organization, and I think we sort of took it for granted. They drafted well in the early part of that stretch, made generally deft moves at the major league level, and really took advantage of the fact that there were teams that were just dumb in the way that teams aren't dumb anymore. The Red Sox had a Hall of Fame GM and Hall of Fame manager in place, and they punted it. Now they are a decent team, with a lot of resources, and a very talented young core. But... it's hard to see how they catch up to Cleveland and Houston right now. They emptied the farm, shortened their window of opportunity, and ended up a very good but not championship caliber team. And I think we're all a little uneasy about it. What if the Sox go out and sign Hosmer for 1. How about the pitching staff stays somewhat healthy and they all pitch closer to there best rather than there worst for 2. Then the batting goes back to something that resembles 2016? It might be pie in the sky to expect so much to go right but if they just play to there capability then arent they right there with Cleveland and Houston? The Sox have a strong catcher duo. A very good outfield and with Devers and Hosmer added to the infield that is a strength. 3 Cy winners or candidates and the best closer in baseball at the back end of the best bullpen in baseball from 2017. They won the East in a down year in regards to hitting and with many injuries. The sky is not falling!
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Oct 10, 2017 9:33:25 GMT -5
Farrell will not be managing the Red Sox next year. It is simply time for a change - and that is more important than any of the factors, plus or minus, that I or anyone else have/can/will raise. Farrell, I think, lost his ability to inspire this particular group of players beyond what they've accomplished - which is admittedly a lot. There is a window of effectiveness - and that is now gone. We saw it happen with Tito. To get to the next level, a change is necessary...and of course this is not the only change needed. Cant argue with this thought, maybe a change at the top is what is needed.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 10, 2017 9:43:55 GMT -5
So I think you've touched on an important point. From maybe 2003 to 2009, the Red Sox were baseball's best run organization, and I think we sort of took it for granted. They drafted well in the early part of that stretch, made generally deft moves at the major league level, and really took advantage of the fact that there were teams that were just dumb in the way that teams aren't dumb anymore. The Red Sox had a Hall of Fame GM and Hall of Fame manager in place, and they punted it. Now they are a decent team, with a lot of resources, and a very talented young core. But... it's hard to see how they catch up to Cleveland and Houston right now. They emptied the farm, shortened their window of opportunity, and ended up a very good but not championship caliber team. And I think we're all a little uneasy about it. What if the Sox go out and sign Hosmer for 1. How about the pitching staff stays somewhat healthy and they all pitch closer to there best rather than there worst for 2. Then the batting goes back to something that resembles 2016? It might be pie in the sky to expect so much to go right but if they just play to there capability then arent they right there with Cleveland and Houston? The Sox have a strong catcher duo. A very good outfield and with Devers and Hosmer added to the infield that is a strength. 3 Cy winners or candidates and the best closer in baseball at the back end of the best bullpen in baseball from 2017. They won the East in a down year in regards to hitting and with many injuries. The sky is not falling! Yep - I would agree that the Red Sox "Everything goes right" situation is better than that of any other team. And I'll take a core of Sale, Betts, Benintendi, Bogaerts, Devers against anyone. I just am worried that the margin for error is thinner and the prospects for improvement are more precarious. Thinking of it as an error bar - I'd say the Red Sox range is 85 <-> 105 , while the Indians and Astros are both like 93 <-> 100
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Oct 10, 2017 9:53:00 GMT -5
So I think you've touched on an important point. From maybe 2003 to 2009, the Red Sox were baseball's best run organization, and I think we sort of took it for granted. They drafted well in the early part of that stretch, made generally deft moves at the major league level, and really took advantage of the fact that there were teams that were just dumb in the way that teams aren't dumb anymore. The Red Sox had a Hall of Fame GM and Hall of Fame manager in place, and they punted it. Now they are a decent team, with a lot of resources, and a very talented young core. But... it's hard to see how they catch up to Cleveland and Houston right now. They emptied the farm, shortened their window of opportunity, and ended up a very good but not championship caliber team. And I think we're all a little uneasy about it. Not sure I agree with "decent team" and with your overall take. I really don't think they're that far off from Cleveland or Houston, I mean the first 2 games against the Astros weren't close but it's not because they had nobodies starting them. It was Sale and Pomeranz. They didn't have it and that's fine, but that's not a bad position to be in as both are great pitchers. Then they won game 3 and by all accounts really should have won game 4. It was a tight series, and that's with basically everyone underperforming badly or being flat out injured. The Red Sox were also the youngest AL playoff team and the core is pretty much locked for the near future. There's a pretty decent chance that everyone on the line-up will be better next season and their biggest holes are theoretically easier to fill at 1B and DH. They're closer to the Indians and Astros then you're implying, it didn't happen this year but their window is far from closed. If Sale doesn't suck in the second half next year, if Pomeranz keep improving, if Price is healthy and if Eddie finally learns some consistency, they could be in really really great shape. IMO they're very much a championship caliber team when healthy and ready.
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Oct 10, 2017 9:54:56 GMT -5
Farrell's managerial record
Toronto 2011 81-81 Toronto 2012 73-89 Boston 2013 97-65 - 1st place, 22-10 post season, WS win (extraordinary year - Boston Strong - unique veteran-led team) Boston 2014 71-91 Boston 2015 78-84 Boston 2016 93-69 - 1st place, swept post season - Big Papi's last (huge) year - Mookie - offense dominated, Porcello Cy Boston 2017 93-69 - 1st place, 1 win post season - power gap, drop off from youth stars, Devers joins, Sale and Kimbrel huge
Kind of an "all or nothing" record, already 5 years in Boston (time flies), First to worst, then edges back up to back to back firsts - but in game mgt issues still hang over his head. Is this the current plateau with him managing this particular team?
Big question of course - if he goes, who comes? What are the necessary attributes to manage a talented team in this highly scrutinized city?
Intrigue for sure.
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Oct 10, 2017 10:19:37 GMT -5
The Theo dreams of building a dynasty are long gone. We have little money, little on the farm, and are clearly over-matched by Houston, Cleveland, NYY, LAD... Kinda stuck with the old Sullivan-Gorman strategy of try to stagger to the playoffs and hope to get red hot in October for a few years. So I think you've touched on an important point. From maybe 2003 to 2009, the Red Sox were baseball's best run organization, and I think we sort of took it for granted. They drafted well in the early part of that stretch, made generally deft moves at the major league level, and really took advantage of the fact that there were teams that were just dumb in the way that teams aren't dumb anymore. The Red Sox had a Hall of Fame GM and Hall of Fame manager in place, and they punted it. Now they are a decent team, with a lot of resources, and a very talented young core. But... it's hard to see how they catch up to Cleveland and Houston right now. They emptied the farm, shortened their window of opportunity, and ended up a very good but not championship caliber team. And I think we're all a little uneasy about it. I think it is a mix of the old system allowing big market teams to use that advantage in the acquisition of players, combined with having a very innovative GM who maximized that by loading up on draft picks. It is hard to ignore that those advantages have been largely removed. The number of compensation picks has been reduced (essentially it was 2 for 1, and is now a limited 1 for 1), the ability to buy signability kids in later rounds (Westmoreland, Lars, etc.) is removed by the draft cap, and because of that cap and the comp pick coming in the same place in the draft, the ability to have players fall (Bard) is limited. Same changes on the international signings, where the cap now makes everyone equal and even gives lower ranked teams an advantage. Even though the system changed in the early 10s, we briefly enjoyed the benefits of finishing last, and thereby benefitting from the new scheme -- Ball (!!), Benintendi and Groome. But that has percolated through the system, and we are drafting at the back end, and therefore are back to hoping for luck -- a Mookie type mid round kid. I still think that riding the youth will be better. Betts had an off year, and Bogarts was horrible, and Benintendi was a rookie. We also are suffering from Ben C's horrible moves -- spending the $300 million in free salary on Panda, Hanley, Porcello, and Castillo. If even one of those had been impactful for more than a half season, we'd be in a far superior position. As it is, we have to hope the kids rebound, and with a full season of Devers, go farther. Remember, even the brilliant Theo saw that short series playoffs are a crap shoot. If you look at it as getting into that position even in an off year for most players, they are on target for the window. Add in DD's giving away assets for a middle relievers who could not pitch, Carson Smith and Thornburg, and whatever crapshoot there was becomes harder.
|
|
|
Post by klostrophobic on Oct 10, 2017 12:04:06 GMT -5
Oh my god just fire them both and start anew. You simply are at such a disadvantage when you have these idiots running the team. Farrell should have been fired off the duckboat as far as I'm concerned. There is so much talent on this team and the leaders can't figure out how to use them effectively. The philosophy that espouses running into outs at record-setting pace is not one I want to watch any longer. Bring in someone who understands the value of outs (you have 27 per game, don't waste them) and how to put his players in advantageous positions. Maybe go get that guy in Arizona.
|
|
|
Post by DesignatedKyle on Oct 10, 2017 12:14:22 GMT -5
I don't love the guy but I also don't see any realistic option out there who would be noticeably better.
|
|
|
Post by kevfc89 on Oct 10, 2017 12:34:02 GMT -5
I would LOVE to give a serious look at Gabe Kapler; he's younger, he's more new-school in terms of baseball thinking, seems like a great communicator, and he knows what this market is all about. If you search around, there's a lot on the web you can find about Kapler's thought process, and he appears to be a very smart guy. He's also now the Director of Player Development for the Dodgers, so he has legitimate experience in an important role for a very successful organization (who's produced a lot of good young players). I think we should be bold and get ahead of the curve by actually trying to upgrade at the manager spot. Farrell is not a terrible manager--I think he's pretty mediocre, which is generally fine--but between his strange personality/communication style, sub-optimal decision-making, and seeming inability to get the most out of our young talent, the case for an upgrade is clear. I think I'd also want to get some new voices in the coaching staff (but keep around a Butterfield if possible).
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 10, 2017 14:38:37 GMT -5
Will he get fired? I voted that he will. I can't imagine that management will 1) keep Farrell around and 2) stay under the luxury tax limit after the Red Sox bowed out for the 2nd straight season, had a bunch of brushfires that made the team look bad, and looked clearly inferior to the Astros, Indians, and Yankees (even with the empty division title), too, by season's end.This just isn't true at all (please check their August / September record). You have had this narrative all year and it isn't anymore true because they lost in the ALDS. The Indians and Astros were slightly better and the Yankees were worse. As far as Farrell, I don't think he will be back. I can't really say whether that is good or not, but I think a change in leadership should probably occur. I'm sorry Jerry but we'll have to agree to disagree. I stand by what I said. This team lost to a superior team in Houston who finished 8 games better in the standings and beat up the Sox six times in 8 late season games. The Red Sox missed an opportunity to extend the series to 5, but I never felt the Sox lost to an inferior or even equal team. The Indians were certainly superior to the Red Sox. That showed very clearly in the standings, a nine game difference, a better run differential, which I believe NY, Houston, and Cleveland all had better than the Sox. I honestly have felt the Yankees have been the better team this season. The Red Sox held off the Yankees in the division race, and it was extremely gutsy, and it felt that way because NY has the better team. It might not be a total blowout but this year the Yankees were really the better team. They score a good deal more runs and their pitching wasn't that inferior to the Red Sox. The Red Sox middle of the order was no match for NY's. What kept the Yankees down was the mid-season mess that Chapman was, while Kimbrel excelled all season, until he had his problems come at the worst time, yesterday. Actually it's a credit to Farrell (and a knock on Girardi who's come under fire in NY) that the Red Sox wound up around where they're supposed to while the Yankees underachieved their Pythag record. As a matter of fact, they're still playing meaningful baseball, unlike the Red Sox. Hopefully for one more day only, although my gut tells me they're going to the ALCS.
|
|
|
Post by aznpopsical on Oct 10, 2017 15:00:07 GMT -5
The Theo dreams of building a dynasty are long gone. We have little money, little on the farm, and are clearly over-matched by Houston, Cleveland, NYY, LAD... Kinda stuck with the old Sullivan-Gorman strategy of try to stagger to the playoffs and hope to get red hot in October for a few years. So I think you've touched on an important point. From maybe 2003 to 2009, the Red Sox were baseball's best run organization, and I think we sort of took it for granted. They drafted well in the early part of that stretch, made generally deft moves at the major league level, and really took advantage of the fact that there were teams that were just dumb in the way that teams aren't dumb anymore. The Red Sox had a Hall of Fame GM and Hall of Fame manager in place, and they punted it. Now they are a decent team, with a lot of resources, and a very talented young core. But... it's hard to see how they catch up to Cleveland and Houston right now. They emptied the farm, shortened their window of opportunity, and ended up a very good but not championship caliber team. And I think we're all a little uneasy about it. Agree with everything except the part where you said we can't catch up to cle and hou, all just because I'm a helpless Red Sox homer. Sure our young players could be frustrating sometimes, but I refuse not to believe in them. I do hope moving forward, they focus more on player developing, and I'm talking proper player developing. I do not wanna hear our coaches talking about aggressive base running to manufacture runs, which too often appears to be more reckless than aggressive, because we're not a power hitting team. We're not a power hitting team because our players are not being developed as power hitting players, simple as that. I could easily see us having major uptick in home runs with proper philosophy changes in the offseason, and I think a lot of that is by getting back to being more analytics oriented. For me personally, it was a lot more fun to follow the sox prior to dombrowski taking over for the simple fact that win or lose, I never had any doubt that this is one of the smarter organizations in the league, if not the smartest. I feel like dombrowski really took that away by implementing his old school thinking and idiotic moves. Words can't even describe how much I despise this self inflicted "window", it's like we're being forced to expect the sox to play in the World Series, which is just plain dumb when it comes to a sport like baseball
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 10, 2017 15:21:38 GMT -5
This is what people need to remember about Farrell. After game 1, he wasn't bad for the most part.
But, I can't help but wonder what might have been different if there was more urgency in game 1. Farrell managed the game like it was the regular season. Leaving Sale in to give up 5 when he didn't have anything all game was ridiculous. Sending him out for the 6th was ridiculous. And then he brought in Kelly with 2 runners on which we all knew with 100% certainty that they would score and they did.
I guarantee after the game, he was spoken to about his sense of urgency and the fact that he didn't use any of the good relievers in the bullpen to keep a playoff game close and winnable. From game 2 on, he was different. But he still didn't come up with it himself.
|
|
|
Post by congusgambler33 on Oct 10, 2017 17:28:25 GMT -5
I voted yes, but it is not my hope. I don't know if it is him or the other coaches, but the game the Sox brought to the table was downright boring. No imagination in game management and very poor baserunning. I saw that some posters were saying that DD should be fired but I caution them in saying that we didn't get a big bat because of all the deals that Ben C made that put him in a box with the luxury cap. they will be under the cap this year and will let them release all their resources next year. DD provided Farrell with the players that he thought would make this team compete and he did a very good job overall with that. Without the big bat, he made the deal for Sale to strengthen the pitching staff to augment the less amount of run production. Porcello's collapse really strained that philosophy, but an unsung hero stepped up in Pomeranz a DD trade. Nunez was a spark that DD brought in and made a huge difference in the lineup and he brought Devers up along with that which paid dividends. Nunez injury really hurt the Sox. the only 2 moves that were busts for DD were the Thornburg trade and letting Lovullo go to AZ.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 10, 2017 17:33:08 GMT -5
This is what people need to remember about Farrell. After game 1, he wasn't bad for the most part. But, I can't help but wonder what might have been different if there was more urgency in game 1. Farrell managed the game like it was the regular season. Leaving Sale in to give up 5 when he didn't have anything all game was ridiculous. Sending him out for the 6th was ridiculous. And then he brought in Kelly with 2 runners on which we all knew with 100% certainty that they would score and they did. I guarantee after the game, he was spoken to about his sense of urgency and the fact that he didn't use any of the good relievers in the bullpen to keep a playoff game close and winnable. From game 2 on, he was different. But he still didn't come up with it himself. Now that you mention this, you have to wonder if Sale's presence in the 5th and 6th innings when he clearly didn't have it and was totally laboring was a decision that came back to kill the Red Sox in the 8th inning of Game 4? Sale was pretty much out of gas after he escaped the 7th inning jam he was in. The Astros noticed his command was not as sharp. If Sale hadn't wasted those bullets in the 5th and 6th inning of Game 1, would he have had enough bullets left to get three more outs in the 8th inning of Game 4? You know the hope was that he pitches thru the 8th with a lead and Kimbrel comes in with a clean inning and closes out the game, but Sale ran out of bullets in the 8th, not that the runner on 1st with two outs should have scored had Kimbrel done his job.
|
|
|
Post by Smittyw on Oct 11, 2017 7:15:53 GMT -5
From yesterday's 108 Stitches:
Can anyone with a subscription give some insight into this bit?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 11, 2017 8:34:29 GMT -5
Got our answer quickly. John Farrell fired.
|
|
|