|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 21, 2016 17:06:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by station13 on Apr 21, 2016 17:08:10 GMT -5
Aye
Too much under performances.
|
|
|
Post by theghostofjoecronin on Apr 21, 2016 17:11:11 GMT -5
Couldn't click yes fast enough. Multiple games lost already solely by managerial decisions. I'd say he has ridden the 2013 coattails for long enough.
|
|
|
Post by bosox89 on Apr 21, 2016 17:17:22 GMT -5
Needed to be gone yesterday
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 21, 2016 17:25:13 GMT -5
Reposting something I originally posted in the gameday thread:
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Apr 21, 2016 17:57:10 GMT -5
Reposting something I originally posted in the gameday thread: Be careful. The mods hate when you do this. jk
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,790
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Apr 21, 2016 17:58:41 GMT -5
It's no surprise Lovullo stayed, or that he can't get out of his deal. There was likely an unspoken, or potentially even spoken agreement, that it's his job if/when Farrell loses it.
Given what Farrell went through last year, the empathetic and morally correct thing to do was give him one more shot to prove that he could manage and get similar results to what we had at the end of the year last season. That's completely fair, he just has proven that he can't manage as well as Lovullo did.
It's not "if", it's "when" Farrell gets fired. With the front office under duress after two terrible years in a row, I just don't see the point of prolonging the inevitable.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,924
|
Post by ericmvan on Apr 21, 2016 18:08:14 GMT -5
I came here to post this in the game thread:
I haven't been watching the games; I check the FanGraphs play log afterwards. But there all messed up; they bear no relationship to any credible reality.
I mean, they have Farrel bringing in Tazawa with a 4-run lead yesterday, and then entrusting a tie game to William Cuevas today. Seriously!
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,649
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Apr 21, 2016 22:21:38 GMT -5
I made a lengthy post in the game thread but I voted yes, fire him, but actually I'm not quite 100% there - I'm more like 98% there but since only 90% was presented as an option so I rounded up to 100% and voted for fire him. I guess it took a different perspective, like actually sitting at Fenway Park watching the game there, to make me determine that this guy's managerial skills are costing the Red Sox. He minimizes the strengths of his pitching staff and today Kevin Cash totally outmanaged him.
I usually don't think that highly of managerial strategy as far as being a big determining factor of what makes a manager great. Most moves are defensible. I care more about allotted playing time, running a pitching staff, and creating a cohesive clubhouse, but you can't be that bad as a game manager, and unfortunately today sold me on him being that bad.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 21, 2016 22:44:26 GMT -5
My perspective is that throughout the greatest majority of his managerial career, his teams have seriously under-performed pre-season estimates. It's well past the point that you can call it statistical static.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Apr 21, 2016 23:44:51 GMT -5
So promote Lovullo and bring in an experienced guy to help him?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 22, 2016 7:12:44 GMT -5
A few years too late, but yeah so ready to fire him. Although at this time, he is being blamed for more than he's responsible for. There are a lot of things not going right. To have the team in a position where no good relief pitchers are available late in a tie game is inexcusable though. They might want to consider leaving pitchers in for a 2nd inning after a quick first inning more often so they don't use everyone every game. And as disappointing as Barnes has been, he didn't get leapfrogged by Ramirez or Cuevas on the depth chart, so I'm not sure why he was brought in first when they were down 8-5 yesterday.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,821
|
Post by wcp3 on Apr 22, 2016 7:32:56 GMT -5
The biggest mystery to me is where Farrell ever got his reputation as a pitching genius. Even when he was the pitching coach, guys never really seemed to exceed expectations. And, of course, his in-game management is a horror.
Looking at his entire body of work dating back to Toronto, that 2013 run appears to be a complete anomaly. The guy has to go.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Apr 22, 2016 8:34:01 GMT -5
I voted no, but not because he has a "garbage team". Injuries to the pitching staff coupled with oiur "ace" getting off to a slow start have impinged upon his success.
|
|
|
Post by mandelbro on Apr 22, 2016 8:46:26 GMT -5
Yes.
1. He's managed to lock up the Darwin award for bullpen management in 15 games. He's the most overmatched in-game manager the Red Sox have had in recent memory, and the most overmatched decision maker any local sports franchise has had in recent memory.
2. The biggest reason one would not fire a manager in-season is because you have to wait until the offseason to find a replacement anyway. Well... we have a better candidate sitting in the dugout biding his time.
3. Farrell's biggest contribution, and why he was the perfect follow-up to Valentine in 2013, was the ability to get veteran players to buy in. Well, the Red Sox are no longer a veteran team. Keeping JF around solely to manage egos when there aren't as many egos to manage anymore doesn't make sense.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,790
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Apr 22, 2016 9:14:54 GMT -5
I think he's done a great job in the clubhouse. If Farrell could just be a neutral as an in game manager, I'd have no problem with him. He isn't though.
2013 was as fun as it was rare because our medium sized investments performed incredibly well. Victorino and Napoli were just awesome that year. And Bogaerts came up and was a force in the playoffs. Just a special year. Even our bench players like Carp raked.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Apr 22, 2016 9:18:25 GMT -5
I'm in the camp to have Lovullo take over. I know this is not the same team as last year's 2nd half, but it has the bulk of the same players. For some reason that can't be quantified, they played better in that time span last year. Farrell needs to be "promoted" to Asst GM, or Consultant to GM, or something. Who would be bench coach? I know this is a SSS, just feel we can't get to be 8 or 9 games out by late May & then make a change.
|
|
|
Post by awall on Apr 22, 2016 9:20:12 GMT -5
I don't think he makes it much into May, and there's a good chance he's gone within a week. I don't think the players have any confidence in him.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Apr 22, 2016 9:32:37 GMT -5
I made a lengthy post in the game thread but I voted yes, fire him, but actually I'm not quite 100% there - I'm more like 98% there but since only 90% was presented as an option so I rounded up to 100% and voted for fire him. I guess it took a different perspective, like actually sitting at Fenway Park watching the game there, to make me determine that this guy's managerial skills are costing the Red Sox. He minimizes the strengths of his pitching staff and today Kevin Cash totally outmanaged him. I usually don't think that highly of managerial strategy as far as being a big determining factor of what makes a manager great. Most moves are defensible. I care more about allotted playing time, running a pitching staff, and creating a cohesive clubhouse, but you can't be that bad as a game manager, and unfortunately today sold me on him being that bad. That's pretty much how I think about it to a T. The 2013 team bought him a lot of credibility with me, and the 2014 disaster wasn't really his "fault." But they should've been much better in 2015, and while they had some bad luck at the start of the year with the staff, it seems to me that the team's performance under Lovullo is a pretty good barometer of their "real talent" level. Now they're back under .500, despite adding Price and Kimbrel to that moderately successful post-ASG team. And the specific problem: poor in-game management (particularly timing and volume of reliever use and hitter match ups) is very, very clear. Glaring, even. I'm at 98% or so myself, but it's a tiny twinge of doubt at this point, and only because it's *so* early. But when I really think about it, it's been a continuation of the past two years, so it's not "early," it's in time to save the season.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 22, 2016 9:34:35 GMT -5
I don't think anyone will be under the delusion that moving Farrell to the front office is a "promotion" for him. If that's the option offered to him, Farrell might well just turn it down, just like Cherington resigned rather than being the second in command under Dombrowski.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 22, 2016 9:41:07 GMT -5
It's really a no-brainer right now since Lovullo is here. The only argument against firing your manager this early is from the people who argue with 'how could it be worse without him?'
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Apr 22, 2016 9:48:04 GMT -5
I voted yes. I don't think he should have been brought back to begin with. The time to move on from him was during the off season. The bigger question for me is did Dombrowski make the right moves during the off season to put this team in it's best possible position to contend? I like the addition of Price & Kimbrel, but I absolutely hate that he kept Farrell & the trade of Miley for Smith, which I think seriously hurt the teams pitching depth.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Apr 22, 2016 10:15:51 GMT -5
I don't think anyone will be under the delusion that moving Farrell to the front office is a "promotion" for him. If that's the option offered to him, Farrell might well just turn it down, just like Cherington resigned rather than being the second in command under Dombrowski. While I agree with the Cherington clear demotion (GM to AGM) & his deciding to leave made sense. Is a manager's move to the front office a demotion? Not sure of the ML hierarchy of FO vs on-field managers. I do agree that he may consider that drop in responsibilities.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 22, 2016 10:27:58 GMT -5
Whether or not it comes with a higher paycheck or greater responsibilities, as a practical matter, everyone (likely including Farrell himself) will understand the situation to be that the front office fired Farrell because he was a bad manager. If they made that transition during the offseason, maybe it'd be a little different (especially if the cancer cloud was still hovering over him), but if they did it mid-season after Farrell got slammed by the media/fans for making bad strategic decisions, everyone will see it as a firing and not a promotion.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,790
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Apr 22, 2016 10:30:19 GMT -5
Agreed, a sugar coated firing was a possibility this winter, but not now.
|
|