Farrell Fails Again

[nothumb]

The argument that using player X is wrong because you held back player Y and he didn't end up impacting the game is some remedial Logic 101 bullshit. Come the fuck on. You don't know whether Player Y will impact the game or not when you decide to use player X, but you do know that Player Y may be needed to do any number of things, whereas Player X is pretty much only good for the one thing you are having him do. The marginal utility of burning Y over X for a fairly menial task is quite a bit lower than the downside of, say, having to use an emergency catcher, or running out of pitchers.

 

[czar]

Minimizing bad luck is pretty much the basis of every decision coaches make. When you bring in your closer, its not because you know hes going to get people out, its because he has a higher probability of it, and a lower probability of shitting the bed. You're minimizing the chance of bad luck (the pitcher having a bad day) by bringing in the pitcher who is least likely to do that.

Pinch running Wright was a decision that had a high probability of going badly, with a high cost if it went badly, and very little upside. Its exactly the sort of decision managers should avoid.

Exactly why pitchers like Clayton Kershaw shouldn't pitch until the playoffs. Wouldn't want to risk him injuring himself either A) pitching or B) running the bases. Minimize that bad luck.

This Wright argument has devolved way beyond the mess it was two days ago. Steven Wright is a major league ballplayer. To accuse Farrell of being an idiot for thinking Steven Wright couldn't stand near 2B and run towards Brian Butterfield when Butter yelled "RUN" is absurd

 

[Hoodie Sleeves]

Exactly why pitchers like Clayton Kershaw shouldn't pitch until the playoffs. Wouldn't want to risk him injuring himself either A) pitching or B) running the bases. Minimize that bad luck.

This Wright argument has devolved way beyond the mess it was two days ago. Steven Wright is a major league ballplayer. To accuse Farrell of being an idiot for thinking Steven Wright couldn't stand near 2B and run towards Brian Butterfield when Butter yelled "RUN" is absurd

Could we have this discussion without making up ridiculous strawmen?

 

[Hoodie Sleeves]

Both of the examples you linked are of players getting injured running TO a base. I specifically said it's very rare for a pitcher to get injured diving back, and is therefore almost totally unpredictable.
.

Is your argument that Steven Wright was not to be expected to run TO a base?

 

[joe dokes]

It’s a tiny risk but why take it at all especially with your top of the rotation starter? It has happened before, as Dehab (above) has pointed out.

Letting Ortiz run is a bigger risk? I think Lively’s point is interesting on this (not to mention the excellent post by Hoodie Sleaves). Lively argues that “Ortiz has more base running experience than most guys in MLB. He might not be the fastest, but Wright is not a more talented base runner than he is.”

"Its a tiny risk"....just as tiny as the starting catcher getting hurt? Because that would take Leon out of the equation.

Yes, Ortiz has more baserunning experience, but he's a walking injury, who seems to pay dearly for every 5 extra minutes he stands up. My sense is that his physical condition has something to do with his retirement. (My sense, and the fact that he has said it repeatedly).

 

[E5 Yaz]

Could we have this discussion without making up ridiculous strawmen?

Oh, we're way beyond that point

 

[czar]

Could we have this discussion without making up ridiculous strawmen?

I am merely providing an example counter to your statement of "minimizing bad luck is pretty much the basis of every decision coaches make."

That statement is wrong. The manager's job is to produce the best expected outcome from a weighted EV standpoint. Pitching Clayton Kershaw obviously means risking something bad happening to him. However, you have to weigh the expected gain with the expected loss. You can't just coddle every useful player because something bad might happen.

In the case of Wright, the expected loss seems extremely small, especially since I'm sure the expectation was "don't do anything stupid at 2B" and the objective evidence shows that hundreds of pitchers run the bases every year and the vast majority of them are fine.

And, TBH, given the morose attitude around here ("the season is over if it is fractured...") when Ortiz fouled that ball off his shin, even if Wright was 5x more likely to get injured than Ortiz (a massive stretch), it seems like you'd still want Ortiz not to get injured by pinch running late in a game you have a <10% win expectancy in.

But I'm done with this "Fire Farrell for pinch-running Wright" argument. There was exactly 1 post in the game thread (can't remember whose, but he posted upthread) that even moderately questioned the move at the time. No one cared about it until Wright suddenly "wasn't feeling well" two days ago. It's the ultimate hindsight attack and it doesn't hold much water given that every AL team has SP that hit/run the bases during interleague and (to my knowledge) none of them have been seriously hurt this season. I'm sure Steven Wright would be the first to tell you that him jamming his shoulder is all on him and he's probably pissed way more at himself than anyone in the clubhouse is pissed at Farrell.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

That's about the type of response I expected, but do you really not think the decision to DL a player (or not) is impacted by the rest of the roster and the player's performance?

If he ends up missing a month I will eat crow, but if he comes back next week and looks great, you've got to at least consider it.

I've done more than consider it. I have believed that this was more than likely the case from Day One. Actually I considered it as an intriguing possibility before Day One so when it did occur I wasn't surprised.

I love the Sehorn comparison that implies any professional athlete is greatly at risk when performing any task that differs from their normal routine. As if returning kicks in the NFL with gunners who run a 4.5 sprinting down the field looking to decapitste you remotely resembles running from 2nd base to home plate on a base hit. Seriously, there was a greater chance of Wright being injured shoveling his driveway in November on the way to Whole Foods than he was pinch running in that game.

 

[Rovin Romine]

This is extremely incorrect.

Wright has 253 career minor league (and winter league) PA. It's not like Farrell pulled some 250lb 40 year old out of the crowd and said "stand on 2B.

And yet, we'd be better off if he had.

Just to remind everyone, the call wasn't made in a vacuum.
The Sox were behind 2-6 at the top of the 6th. Ortiz walked with two outs in the inning. Farrell didn't PR for him. Betts singled, scoring Benintendi from second. Sox are now behind 5-6. At that point Farrell chose to PR for Ortiz - with the obvious intention that the runner might be able to go from second to home on a base hit. This wasn't station to station running to spare Ortiz's legs. It was a runner that represented the tying run, that might be challenged at the plate. Which makes this even more odd.

Farrell had Hanley Ramierz on the bench - which he used to PH for the #9 spot in the last inning.

Who else was on the bench?

 

[Hoodie Sleeves]

I am merely providing an example counter to your statement of "minimizing bad luck is pretty much the basis of every decision coaches make."

That statement is wrong. The manager's job is to produce the best expected outcome from a weighted EV standpoint. Pitching Clayton Kershaw obviously means risking something bad happening to him. However, you have to weigh the expected gain with the expected loss. You can't just coddle every useful player because something bad might happen..

That's not a counter example of what I said at all. It's a perfect example of how you're not bothering to read posts and posting the sort of kneejerk nonsense you're accusing others of doing.

Sitting Kershaw the entire season maximizes the chances of losing games because pitchers prone to shitty games get lots of opportunities. Making decisions is about balancing the maximization of good opportunities and minimizing bad opportunities. Minimizing chances for catastrophic bad luck absolutely falls into that.

Pinch running Wright is an example of doing this terribly, because:

1. The probability of him being a good baserunner is extremely low.
2. The probability of him being hurt is higher than the probability of a player who runs the bases regularly being hurt.
3. The cost of him getting hurt is extremely high.

Almost no upside, with an increased chance of catastrophic downside - that's pretty much the definition of a bad decision.

The fact that Wright got hurt the way he did is unlucky, of course, and it's probably the worst case scenario, but Farrel's decision maximized the chance of something bad happening. It was a bad decision.

 

[FanSinceBoggs]

Just to clear up a lingering issue. Wright was asked about the last time he ran the bases. His answer: "Wright said he hadn't run the bases since 2003 or 2004. That is when he was in high school or starting college baseball."

LINK: http://www.redsoxlife.com/2016/08/ace-move-begs-wright-questions_11.html

 

[glennhoffmania]

And yet, we'd be better off if he had.

Just to remind everyone, the call wasn't made in a vacuum.
The Sox were behind 2-6 at the top of the 6th. Ortiz walked with two outs in the inning. Farrell didn't PR for him. Betts singled, scoring Benintendi from second. Sox are now behind 5-6. At that point Farrell chose to PR for Ortiz - with the obvious intention that the runner might be able to go from second to home on a base hit. This wasn't station to station running to spare Ortiz's legs. It was a runner that represented the tying run, that might be challenged at the plate. Which makes this even more odd.

Farrell had Hanley Ramierz on the bench - which he used to PH for the #9 spot in the last inning.

Who else was on the bench?

I tend to agree with the bold. Putting aside the issue of how likely Wright was to get injured, was this a smart strategic move? Not to mention, it was the 6th inning, not the 9th. Ortiz would've hit at least one more time. Why did he take his bat out of the lineup? If it was a physical issue (and maybe it was- I didn't see the game and maybe it was mentioned earlier in the thread) then fine. Otherwise, why is Farrell removing his best hitter in the 6th inning down by a run to marginally upgrade the speed at second? It's not like Ortiz was being replaced with a very fast runner. How many singles would Wright score on (or even be sent home) that Ortiz wouldn't?

 

[BestGameEvah]

Just to clear up a lingering issue. Wright was asked about the last time he ran the bases. His answer: "Wright said he hadn't run the bases since 2003 or 2004. That is when he was in high school or starting college baseball."

LINK: http://www.redsoxlife.com/2016/08/ace-move-begs-wright-questions_11.html

Oh my goodness. Is the man an athlete or not? They train in Spring Training and base running is a very big part of that.

 

[czar]

And yet, we'd be better off if he had.

Just to remind everyone, the call wasn't made in a vacuum.
The Sox were behind 2-6 at the top of the 6th. Ortiz walked with two outs in the inning. Farrell didn't PR for him. Betts singled, scoring Benintendi from second. Sox are now behind 5-6. At that point Farrell chose to PR for Ortiz - with the obvious intention that the runner might be able to go from second to home on a base hit. This wasn't station to station running to spare Ortiz's legs. It was a runner that represented the tying run, that might be challenged at the plate. Which makes this even more odd.

Farrell had Hanley Ramierz on the bench - which he used to PH for the #9 spot in the last inning.

Who else was on the bench?

Of note, my quoted figure was wrong and I deleted it ~30 seconds after I posted it. My apologies -- FSB did post something where Wright said he hadn't run the bases in a game since college.

 

[Rovin Romine]

I tend to agree with the bold. Putting aside the issue of how likely Wright was to get injured, was this a smart strategic move? Not to mention, it was the 6th inning, not the 9th. Ortiz would've hit at least one more time. Why did he take his bat out of the lineup? If it was a physical issue (and maybe it was- I didn't see the game and maybe it was mentioned earlier in the thread) then fine. Otherwise, why is Farrell removing his best hitter in the 6th inning down by a run to marginally upgrade the speed at second? It's not like Ortiz was being replaced with a very fast runner. How many singles would Wright score on (or even be sent home) that Ortiz wouldn't?

It was an NL game. Aug. 7, if you want to further look up the play by play.

Of note, my quoted figure was wrong and I deleted it ~30 seconds after I posted it. My apologies -- FSB did post something where Wright said he hadn't run the bases in a game since college.

I didn't even think to look to see if it was still there before hitting the post button. As a heavy user of the edit function, I should apologize to you.

 

[czar]

That's not a counter example of what I said at all. It's a perfect example of how you're not bothering to read posts and posting the sort of kneejerk nonsense you're accusing others of doing.

Sitting Kershaw the entire season maximizes the chances of losing games because pitchers prone to shitty games get lots of opportunities. Making decisions is about balancing the maximization of good opportunities and minimizing bad opportunities. Minimizing chances for catastrophic bad luck absolutely falls into that.

Pinch running Wright is an example of doing this terribly, because:

1. The probability of him being a good baserunner is extremely low.
2. The probability of him being hurt is higher than the probability of a player who runs the bases regularly being hurt.
3. The cost of him getting hurt is extremely high.

Almost no upside, with an increased chance of catastrophic downside - that's pretty much the definition of a bad decision.

The fact that Wright got hurt the way he did is unlucky, of course, and it's probably the worst case scenario, but Farrel's decision maximized the chance of something bad happening. It was a bad decision.

But what evidence do you have to support that? Again, how many pitchers in the last decade have hurt themselves running the bases compared to how many have done it without getting injured? I've seen like 3 examples in this thread.

Meanwhile, we saw firsthand that, when confronted with a potential season-ending injury to David Ortiz, everyone in Red Sox nation virtually conceded that 2016 was over.

So I'd argue that A) there was upside in pinch-running for the slow 40-year-old best hitter on your team who had just asked out of a game the day before because he was sore. I'd also argue B) that everyone in this thread is continuing to vastly overrate the odds of Steven Wright getting hurt on the basepaths.

I generally HATE using this analogy, but I mean, how many folks in this thread (myself included) are WAY less athletic than Steven Wright, have done WAY less baserunning drills in spring training/preparation for interleague than Steven Wright and yet have not managed to injure themselves running the bases in rec-league baseball or softball games? That's essentially what Wright was asked to do. Just stand near the bag and run from point A to point B. It's not apples-to-apples, but in almost all of these "Farrell is an idiot" arguments you need to assume a "fairly high" probability of getting injured (relative to Wright's other day-to-day pitching activities) yet there is NO OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE that that is the case. It's all hand-wavy and essentially denigrates Wright by assuming he's an unathletic oaf who can't do what many amateur/rec-league players do successfully on a nightly basis.

(Now I'm done.)

 

[BestGameEvah]

Here's an example from this year...Bochy.
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/07/giants-scored-insurance-run-pitchers-cain-bumgarner-nationals

 

[glennhoffmania]

It was an NL game. Aug. 7, if you want to further look up the play by play.

Yeah I was being dumb. For some reason I thought Ortiz was playing 1B that game, not pinch hitting. Carry on.

 

[nothumb]

Don't waste a well reasoned argument on Hoodie, his "research" in this thread makes it pretty clear that he thinks he's entitled to his own facts in addition to his own opinions.

I would love to hear some critics of the Wright move construct a conditional probability statement about Wright's chance of injury and the loss of performance vs. Papi's rather than just pull "CATASTROPHIC DOWNSIDE" out of thin air. Make sure to include the part where the downside is most likely that Wright misses two starts in 90 degree weather and the Sox go at least .500 in those games.

 

[Hoodie Sleeves]

I generally HATE using this analogy, but I mean, how many folks in this thread (myself included) are WAY less athletic than Steven Wright, have done WAY less baserunning drills in spring training/preparation for interleague than Steven Wright and yet have not managed to injure themselves running the bases in rec-league baseball or softball games? That's essentially what Wright was asked to do. Just stand near the bag and run from point A to point B. It's not apples-to-apples, but in almost all of these "Farrell is an idiot" arguments you need to assume a "fairly high" probability of getting injured (relative to Wright's other day-to-day pitching activities) yet there is NO OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE that that is the case. It's all hand-wavy and essentially denigrates Wright by assuming he's an unathletic oaf who can't do what many amateur/rec-league players do successfully on a nightly basis.

(Now I'm done.)

You're saying that running the bases in beer league softball is the same as the major leagues? And you're asking me for evidence?

Nobody is arguing that Steven Wright getting injured was a certainty. We're arguing it was a higher risk than for a position player. What we're arguing has been pretty firmly established and clarified, but you can continue arguing against arguments that no one is making if you want - it seems to be your thing.

Don't waste a well reasoned argument on Hoodie, his "research" in this thread makes it pretty clear that he thinks he's entitled to his own facts in addition to his own opinions.

I would love to hear some critics of the Wright move construct a conditional probability statement about Wright's chance of injury and the loss of performance vs. Papi's rather than just pull "CATASTROPHIC DOWNSIDE" out of thin air. Make sure to include the part where the downside is most likely that Wright misses two starts in 90 degree weather and the Sox go at least .500 in those games.

Why would anyone construct said probability statement? Nobody is arguing that.

 

[dhappy42]

I don't know if they is the best, but they is both quite recent and didn't require looking. And they is moves that a majority of managers very often don't make.

Most managers don't use their closers for four outs, occasionally? Maybe not most, but it's not uncommon. A closer walking four batters in one inning is uncommon. Are you're trying to tell us that Farrell taking Kimbrel out after he walked in a run is an example of Farrell's prowess as a tactical manager? Seems to me that taking a pitcher out -- any pitcher -- after he's walked four batters in an inning is what you'd expect any minimally competent manager to do.

 

[FanSinceBoggs]

Just to clear up a lingering issue. Wright was asked about the last time he ran the bases. His answer: "Wright said he hadn't run the bases since 2003 or 2004. That is when he was in high school or starting college baseball."

LINK: http://www.redsoxlife.com/2016/08/ace-move-begs-wright-questions_11.html

I've been able to corroborate the 2003-2004 years with the Boston Herald:
http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/red_sox/clubhouse_insider/2016/08/steven_wright_hurt_shoulder_pinch_running_replaced_by_clay

2003-2004 is an eternity ago. I was still a young man in 2003-2004. LOL.

Hoodie is right: no one is arguing that point--Farrell had other options besides those two. Thus, it's not Wright versus Ortiz; instead, it is Wright versus all of the other options on the table.

 

[joe dokes]

nm

 

[uncannymanny]

We're arguing it was a higher risk than for a position player. What we're arguing has been pretty firmly established and clarified

And where was this done exactly? When you just said that was the case?

 

[dhappy42]

[edit] miscue

 

[dhappy42]

Nobody is arguing that Steven Wright getting injured was a certainty. We're arguing it was a higher risk than for a position player.

I'd add that we're also arguing that it was an entirely unnecessary risk to take. Using your best starting pitcher as a pinch runner is dumb. It's even more dumb if that pitcher is a relatively unathletic knuckleballer who hasn't run the bases in a decade. It's only slightly less dumb, injury risk-wise, than having Ortiz pinch run for Wright. They're both 3+ WAR players, by the way. Losing Wright to an injury has about the same cost as losing Ortiz to an injury. I'd say losing Wright for two weeks is in some ways worse. There are obvious replacements for Ortiz, Hanley at DH, Shaw to 1B and Holt/Hill at 3rd. A downgrade, sure, but not as big a downgrade as from Wright to Buchholz.

 

[pokey_reese]

To people who hate the idea of letting Wright (or any starting pitcher) run the bases, I would like to pose this question seriously, not in a snarky fashion: Do you think that it would be preferable to bring up a AAA starter for any games played in NL parks, because the downside risk of letting your pitchers run the bases (and thus potentially losing them for multiple games) outweighs the risk of putting a replacement-level pitcher in for one game?

 

[nothumb]

You're saying that running the bases in beer league softball is the same as the major leagues? And you're asking me for evidence?

Nobody is arguing that Steven Wright getting injured was a certainty. We're arguing it was a higher risk than for a position player. What we're arguing has been pretty firmly established and clarified, but you can continue arguing against arguments that no one is making if you want - it seems to be your thing.



Why would anyone construct said probability statement? Nobody is arguing that.

It was definitely one of the options put forward. You can add in other scenarios too, for in-game WPA vs. Injury risk using a different PR if you like. Anything would be better than your current threshold of "because I said so."

 

[dhappy42]

To people who hate the idea of letting Wright (or any starting pitcher) run the bases, I would like to pose this question seriously, not in a snarky fashion: Do you think that it would be preferable to bring up a AAA starter for any games played in NL parks, because the downside risk of letting your pitchers run the bases (and thus potentially losing them for multiple games) outweighs the risk of putting a replacement-level pitcher in for one game?

Do you mean bring up a AAA position player for pinch running duty while temporarily sending down a starter?

Anyone else remember when Buchholz pinch ran in 2009, in a game against the Rangers?

"I was just sort of walking around in the dugout, and they were like, 'Hey, go get your jersey and cleats on because…if [Varitek] gets on second, you're going to pinch run for him,'" Buchholz told the Boston Globe on Saturday. "So I ran up in [the clubhouse] all in a frenzy and the first thing that came in my head was, 'Road game, we're away.' So I got down there and [Francona's] like, you got the wrong jersey on. I was like, 'Oh my God,' so I had to run back up here, put the blue one on. Finally I got back down there — obviously I got back down there an at-bat late — but I went out there anyway. But yeah, the jersey situation was probably the funniest thing out of it all."

Read more at: http://nesn.com/2009/08/bu/

Pedroia doubled, Buchholz got a bad jump and slid head first into home. Was called out. And cut his right hand. He was 25 at the time (not 31, like Wright is this year) and one of the fastest players on the team.

 

[pokey_reese]

Do you mean bring up a AAA position player for pinch running duty while temporarily sending down a starter?

Anyone else remember when Buchholz pinch ran in 2009, in a game against the Rangers?

"I was just sort of walking around in the dugout, and they were like, 'Hey, go get your jersey and cleats on because…if [Varitek] gets on second, you're going to pinch run for him,'" Buchholz told the Boston Globe on Saturday. "So I ran up in [the clubhouse] all in a frenzy and the first thing that came in my head was, 'Road game, we're away.' So I got down there and [Francona's] like, you got the wrong jersey on. I was like, 'Oh my God,' so I had to run back up here, put the blue one on. Finally I got back down there — obviously I got back down there an at-bat late — but I went out there anyway. But yeah, the jersey situation was probably the funniest thing out of it all."

Read more at: http://nesn.com/2009/08/bu/

Pedroia doubled, Buchholz got a bad jump and slid head first into home. Was called out. And cut his right hand. He was 25 at the time (not 31, like Wright is this year) and one of the fastest players on the team.

Sorry, to be clear, I mean bring up a spot starter. I'm trying to get to whether or not the idea is that the risk is too great for pitchers to run the bases, because it increases the odds that the team will have to start a lesser pitcher in the event that the running pitcher gets injured while playing in an NL park.

 

[Plympton91]

To people who hate the idea of letting Wright (or any starting pitcher) run the bases, I would like to pose this question seriously, not in a snarky fashion: Do you think that it would be preferable to bring up a AAA starter for any games played in NL parks, because the downside risk of letting your pitchers run the bases (and thus potentially losing them for multiple games) outweighs the risk of putting a replacement-level pitcher in for one game?

This is like, remedial economics. The benefits you get from him being the starting pitcher rather than a replacement level starter would outweigh any risk of injury, especially because you'd be downgrading the probability of injury by the 20% or less probability of him getting on base.

In the pinch running situation, you're putting him on base and the expected benefit is the difference in the probability that Wright scores when Ortiz wouldn't (vanishingly small) and that Wright is less likely to hurt himself than Ortiz (debatable) and that Wright getting hurt is less catastrophic than Ortiz getting hurt (probably true).

But overall I think it's a 50/50 move on Farrell's part from public info, and what we don't know that Farrell does know is exactly ha close to the breaking point Ortiz really is.

 

[YTF]

Here's an example from this year...Bochy.
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/07/giants-scored-insurance-run-pitchers-cain-bumgarner-nationals

This has been noted several times. It apparently doesn't matter.

 

[YTF]

To people who hate the idea of letting Wright (or any starting pitcher) run the bases, I would like to pose this question seriously, not in a snarky fashion: Do you think that it would be preferable to bring up a AAA starter for any games played in NL parks, because the downside risk of letting your pitchers run the bases (and thus potentially losing them for multiple games) outweighs the risk of putting a replacement-level pitcher in for one game?

Serious response, who do you replace? In this case Eduardo still has options, but do you burn one for this, especially not knowing if he'll be used? Not sure who has options left in the pen, but they might be more valuable on the team. So then you're left with a position player which limits your bench. Nothing wrong with thinking outside the box, but in this case I don't know that bringing up a spot starter is the solution.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

This has been noted several times. It apparently doesn't matter.

Nope it's like a Trump/Hillary debate at this point where one side ignores anything and everything that doesn't fit their agenda.

 

[FanSinceBoggs]

This has been noted several times. It apparently doesn't matter.

I thought it had been addressed, which is why it may have been ignored (no one feels like repeating what has already been said). When was the last time M.Bumgarner and J.Smardjiza (SP?) ran the bases? In high school in 2003? See the point?

It was acknowledged that there is a fundamental difference between the NL and AL. In the former, pitchers have more experience running the bases, whereas Steven Wright hadn't run the bases in over a decade. Some people have argued that using Pomeranz over Wright as a pinch runner would have been acceptable due to his NL experience (see quote below).

But Farrell didn’t use Pomeranz, or a useless contributor like Buchholz, or Leon who didn’t get into the game at all. In his infinite wisdom, Farrell used the 31 year old ace knuckleballer who hadn’t run the bases in over 10 years.

Hurley states, "[Farrell] could have used Drew Pomeranz, who at least had experience on the basepaths having played multiple seasons in the NL for Colorado and San Diego. Pomeranz also looks physically more up to the task, and is likely a better runner than Wright."
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2016/08/12/john-farrell-gets-a-bit-defensive-when-questioned-about-steven-wrights-pinch-running-mishap/

 

[Rasputin]

Wright isn't the ace, Porcello is.

The risk of anyone getting hurt running the bases is tiny.

Buchholz isn't useless.

Can you people really not think of a better criticism of Farrell than that he used a pitcher to pinch run? And no, the argument that Wright is somehow a delicate flower who can't handle running the bases is not a good one. Seriously, he can cover first and he can backup plays all over the place but running the bases puts him at an injury risk.

Sometimes players get hurt. It's not anyone's fault.

 

[DJnVa]

Just because he had not run the bases doesn't mean it's not a tiny part of his job. AL pitchers have to hit once in a while. If Wright happened to get on base in an NL ballpark 2 weeks before this would he have then been "qualified" to pinch run? Because that whole "he hasn't done it since high school" would be moot.

 

[YTF]

I thought it had been addressed, which is why it may have been ignored (no one feels like repeating what has already been said). When was the last time M.Bumgarner and J.Smardjiza (SP?) ran the bases? In high school in 2003? See the point?
/

 

[bradmahn]

Jesus fucking Christ is this tiresome. How is it that PR Wright is still being discussed when the Jaw gave plenty of ammo to the dismissers just one game ago. There is nothing more to be said on the Wright injury. At least discuss Farrell's failings after a win so you can put one strawman to bed.

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

Just because he had not run the bases doesn't mean it's not a tiny part of his job. AL pitchers have to hit once in a while. If Wright happened to get on base in an NL ballpark 2 weeks before this would he have then been "qualified" to pinch run? Because that whole "he hasn't done it since high school" would be moot.

Moot, yet important.

Let's call it "entmoot" for Boromir's Sprowl's sake.

There's no reason to believe that he should be a good pinch runner.

 

[AB in DC]

Jesus fucking Christ is this tiresome. How is it that PR Wright is still being discussed when the Jaw gave plenty of ammo to the dismissers just one game ago. There is nothing more to be said on the Wright injury. At least discuss Farrell's failings after a win so you can put one strawman to bed.

Yeah, the quote below is basically proof that this thread has completely lost touch with reality. There are so, so many better examples of Farrell's poor decisions. There is literally no reason to dwell on it.

They're both 3+ WAR players, by the way. Losing Wright to an injury has about the same cost as losing Ortiz to an injury.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

Can we all just agree that Eduardo Rodriguez would not have gotten hurt tonight if Farrell hadn't started him?

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

Wally could have dropped an anvil on his foot if he hadn't started. That would have been Farrell's fault.

 

[YTF]

I was concerned about Barnes getting hurt Pinch Pitching. I mean there were other options.

 

[4 6 3 DP]

First guess on Abad to Weiters there. Just rather Ziegler in a DP situation.

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

First guess on Abad to Weiters there. Just rather Ziegler in a DP situation.

Yep .. I don't think Ziegler was ready yet though .. Which was on Farrell of course. You have to have both guys warming to start the inning.

 

[DanoooME]

Serious response, who do you replace? In this case Eduardo still has options, but do you burn one for this, especially not knowing if he'll be used? Not sure who has options left in the pen, but they might be more valuable on the team. So then you're left with a position player which limits your bench. Nothing wrong with thinking outside the box, but in this case I don't know that bringing up a spot starter is the solution.

He was already optioned this season, so he can be sent down as many times as necessary since they've already burned the option at the end of June.

 

[YTF]

Thanks

 

[Plympton91]

Can a mod please clean up the snark above from the crew that wants to shout down a discussion the rest of us are having?

 

[absintheofmalaise]

I'm locking this thread because it's too much work to take out all of the crap to keep the discussion on track. Please start another Farrell thread and if someone wants to keep the Wright discussion going, start another one on him too.
Thanks