5/17-5/19 Red Sox @ Twins Series Thread

I agree from a physical sense. Don't want players to over-work themselves going for a win in May. But, not from a tactical sense. My poor starting pitcher will be a little butt-hurt because I pulled him after 4 2/3 in a game he pitched terribly. I hate that mentality.

In fact, I think over-working Dempster was a stupid thing to do from a physical sense. Too many pitches in a game in May by the 5th inning when he clearly doesn't have it. Not to mention a stupid thing to do from a tactical sense. I know why Farrell did it. Just not buying it.

Wasn't Farrell supposed to bring "discipline" or "leadership" to this team or something? Is catering to the stupid pitcher win rules in order to appease your fourth starter's ego really a good example of leadership? And on top of that, if anything is going to have a detrimental effect on this team long term, it's Dempster throwing nearly 130 pitches in less than five innings.

The Don and Jerry show can be pretty terrible sometimes. "Is awkwardly a word?"

Again, this happens all. the. time. Pitchers are highly competitive people, and they like to win. Yes, Farrell let it go a batter or two too long this time for sure. But it's totally acceptable to take into account the desire of a pitcher to finish off the fifth inning in your decisions, so acceptable that it happens essentially every time this situation comes up on every team. "There's a human behind every name, and there's a psyche you have to work with." -- John Farrell (talking about Jacoby Ellsbury, but it fits here)

Fans love to go on and on about "making tough decisions" and just dictating to the players what they have to do, but people aren't like that in any field, baseball or otherwise. I run a small non-profit organization with 8-10 employees, and as much as I'd sometimes like just tell them to do what I want them to do without considering their desires and needs, it's not the way you assert leadership. I could probably get something done a little more efficiently in that moment if I did it that way, and sometimes it's important enough that I do that. But when I do, I've built up enough trust in my folks that they do it with their full attention. Other times, I defer to what they need because it's more important for the long-term health of our team. And, who knows, they might even be right ...

A good baseball manager knows when its important enough to ignore the wishes of his players and when it isn't. Valentine was an idiot who never cared what his players thought, and other managers are too lenient and make the desires of the players paramount. So far, Farrell seems to be a decent mix on this, but we'll see.

There's a difference between overusing your players to the point that they won't be able to contribute to the team wins over the entire season for players, and basically doing sabotage to a game in order to appease to the egos of players as he did yesterday.

The advanced numbers seem to like Ellsbury considerably more in center (career numbers), but they also give Victorino stupid great numbers in right field. He has a ~25 UZR/150 in right for his career, which is probably wrong, but still.

Damn this one could have been broken open.

RS continue to grind with good P, fielding, and a few timely hits. Way to go yet ...keep it up JL.

Which is something that might matter if it wasn't a two run game at the time.

What a grand display by our defensive-minded backup infielder. Routine double play ball, and you throw it right in the runner's nuts.

How does that even happen?

I told you the Red Sox would rue the day they shipped Nick Punto out of town.

I think Chris Parmelee rues that day more than anyone else.