Farrell Watch

Status
Not open for further replies.

drbretto

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 10, 2009
12,078
Concord, NH
Second GM in a row convinced that's how you build a bullpen. Really not working out so well.
The bullpen is one of the best in the majors. It's probably one of the biggest factors in their close game/ extra innings record. I'm not sure what you're trying to get at there.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
Tito chocked away a series lead in the WS last year and is about to do the same this year.

Seriously. The Tito worshiping here is absurd.
What’s absurd is borderline worshipping a manager for back to back East titles. Tito’s teams are prepared to play and is one of if not the best manager in the game. Like I said before I don’t hate Farrell. I simply think his time is up here.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
What’s absurd is borderline worshipping a manager for back to back East titles. Tito’s teams are prepared to play and is one of if not the best manager in the game. Like I said before I don’t hate Farrell. I simply think his time is up here.
A team choking away b2B series leads in the playoffs does not scream “prepared” to me.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,386
He had had Reed up in the pen for how long at that point? He pushed his luck and it didn't pan out. Not egregious, but also not the smartest move.
Keeping Sale in was totally defensible. He was dealing. Looked VERY sharp. Previous seven batters:

Struck out Gattis
Struck out McCann
Springer singled
Riddick flied to shallow left
Struck out Altuve
Correa singled
Struck out Gonzalez

Four k's in seven batters.

Then he threw one bad pitch that, unfortunately, ended up in the seats. It happens.

That said, taking him out and putting in Reed to start the inning would also have been totally defensible.

But I can guarantee that if he pulled Sale and Reed came in and promptly gave up a homer (not an unheard of thing for Reed...5 hr in just 27 ip (1.7 per 9)...2nd worst bullpen HR rate behind Scott's 1.8 per 9), then people would be screaming, "Why pull Sale there? He was rolling and had just thrown 50-something pitches?? Farrell is a total idiot!"
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
Tito is a great manager. If he came back here, we'd love him in many ways, but there'd be major bitching in game threads for some of the decisions he makes.
I agree. But that bitching usually stopped when the playoffs hit. If they had the two wild card spots in 2011 then perhaps Tito is still here. Maybe Theo. Who knows? Tito is never coming back so it’s up to the organization to find someone who could one day be at that level. I don’t believe Farrell is anywhere close to that guy.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
A team choking away b2B series leads in the playoffs does not scream “prepared” to me.
Cubs were the better team. Lots of teams go 2-2 in the Division Series. I’d be stunned if the Yankees won. The Indians are moving on.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
Pulling Sale to have Reed face the right handers coming up would have been an entirely correct and defensible decision. That's why they have Reed on the team.
I thought they kept Reed on the team because the Jaw needed someone to continuously embarrass.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Pulling Sale to have Reed face the right handers coming up would have been an entirely correct and defensible decision. That's why they have Reed on the team.
I agree. That would have been defensible. But Sale is better than Reed against RH's and Gurriel hits RH's better. I sort of didnt care one way or the other in real time. I thought the pitching decisions were fine yesterday. Maybe not exactly what I would have done, but the two best pitchers on the team got beat by a good hitting team, it happens.
 

cannonball 1729

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 8, 2005
3,572
The Sticks
A team choking away b2B series leads in the playoffs does not scream “prepared” to me.
"Choking?" The guy had a rotation of smoke and mirrors and somehow made game 7 of the World Series. Seriously, by the time the playoffs rolled around, the Indians' rotation was down to Kluber, Bauer, and pray for a rain shower. It was entirely because of Tito's management (especially his bullpen management) that they made game 7 of the World Series in the first place.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,386
Pulling Sale to have Reed face the right handers coming up would have been an entirely correct and defensible decision. That's why they have Reed on the team.
Agreed, under normal circumstances. But in no way is he a better pitcher than Chris Sale. And yesterday, Sale was dealing. And just 50-something pitches in. I would have had no problem with them going to Reed to start the 8th, because of what you just said. But keeping Sale in was entirely defensible. It didn't work out.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
I would expect that if Tito was available, we'd love to give him another shot. That doesn't necessarily mean his exit was a mistake at the time*. I agree with his own assessment that the Sox needed a new voice. It wasn't that Tito isn't a capable manager. It's that he had lost the team and it was time for something new (the "something new" that we got is, and should be a cautionary tale as well, though).

But, now, several years later, with a nearly completely new team, Tito could well do an amazing job. I actually wish that scenario was even 1% plausible right now.


*Note: I'm also not trying to argue that running him out of town was the right move, either. Just not exploring that in detail at all right now
This post is the definition of "the grass is always greener on the other side." It's also a pretty good example of "I want to have my cake and eat it too."

What’s absurd is borderline worshipping a manager for back to back East titles. Tito’s teams are prepared to play and is one of if not the best manager in the game. Like I said before I don’t hate Farrell. I simply think his time is up here.
Who is worshiping him? Even the people arguing against the crowd who seems to think it is imperative that he be fired seem to mostly be in the camp that they are "fairly ambivalent about replacing him. If there's an upgrade out there, great. Whatever."

Please show us an example of anyone worshiping Farrell in any way. I mean, I guess you should probably provide evidence of all the other claims you've made that you've been asked for first... so I guess I won't hold my breath here.
 

drbretto

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 10, 2009
12,078
Concord, NH
This post is the definition of "the grass is always greener on the other side." It's also a pretty good example of "I want to have my cake and eat it too."
No, the post is the definition of "times and situations change". Did you even read it or did you just skim?

Edit: That was rhetorical, BTW. You haven't read anything you've argued against in this thread.
 

mauidano

Mai Tais for everyone!
SoSH Member
Aug 21, 2006
35,657
Maui
What’s absurd is borderline worshipping a manager for back to back East titles. Tito’s teams are prepared to play and is one of if not the best manager in the game. Like I said before I don’t hate Farrell. I simply think his time is up here.
You are worshiping Tito. He’s not coming back. You seem to have all the inside info and expert analysis. Who do want to manage the Sox next year?
 

The Gray Eagle

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
16,725
Farrell is under contract for 2018.

There are 3 scenarios: fire him, keep him for next year with no extension, or give him an extension.

If he is let go, the team will have to pay his 2018 salary, plus the salary of the new manager. I cant' find the details of how much Farrell makes. Shouldn't be a big expense in relative terms, but it's not my money.

If he is retained, they will either need to extend him at least one more year, or they will have a "lame duck" manager. The media will be using that "lame duck" status to try to stir up trouble with the players by asking Farrell and the players about it all the time and making it one of the big storylines of the season.

Does anyone want him to get a contract extension? Most of his support here seems to be fairly lukewarm.

I don't think Farrell should get an extension. I guess I could be all right with one year added, to avoid potential distraction, but no more than that.

Going into next year with him as a lame duck could be a distraction, and that possibility would have to be factored into that decision. If they did keep Farrell with no extension, I think he would be on the hot seat from day 1.

Personally, I think he is a mediocre manager overall, not good but not horrible. I think he did a better job this year than last year, despite really disagreeing with some of the things he did this year, but the overall results were about what I thought we would get, factoring in the offensive decline. I think this team had a lot of talent, and maybe should have won a few more games, but they did win a lot and held off NY at the end.

My perception of Farrell is that his teams always win a few games less than they should, and that he is not a good in-game manager. He's not terrible, but if Dombrowski can bring in someone good, then I would support that 100%. But I don't think say Ausmus for example is likely to be much better than Farrell.

if they sack him, whether I'm happy or not depends on who they bring in. The new guy will be under a ton of scrutiny right away, since he will be replacing a guy who won 3 AL East titles and a World Series in 5 years, and is only the second manager in about a hundred years to win a title here.
The new guy would need to get off to a good start, or will be feeling some heat in the media right away. If a new guy comes in, it had better be someone with some experience at least as a bench coach if not a manager. Someone like Varitek would be out of the question for me, not enough experience in any kind of significant coaching role. At least Cora has been a bench coach and has managed professional players.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
This post is the definition of "the grass is always greener on the other side." It's also a pretty good example of "I want to have my cake and eat it too."



Who is worshiping him? Even the people arguing against the crowd who seems to think it is imperative that he be fired seem to mostly be in the camp that they are "fairly ambivalent about replacing him. If there's an upgrade out there, great. Whatever."

Please show us an example of anyone worshiping Farrell in any way. I mean, I guess you should probably provide evidence of all the other claims you've made that you've been asked for first... so I guess I won't hold my breath here.
I’ve provided plenty of evidence on other points that have been backed up by other posters as well. Let me ask you something? Would the Red Sox have won their legendary back to back AL east titles without Farrell? I’d say yes. As far as people worshipping him I can just point to half of the posts on this thread that are treating him as this great manager because he won 93 games and won his back to back division titles.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
You are worshiping Tito. He’s not coming back. You seem to have all the inside info and expert analysis. Who do want to manage the Sox next year?
I’m glad you asked. Demarlo Hale who was in a pretty big role under Tito and Alex Cora immediately come to mind as up and comers. Tek as a dark horse.
 

cannonball 1729

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 8, 2005
3,572
The Sticks
I don't think Farrell should get an extension. I guess I could be all right with one year added, to avoid potential distraction, but no more than that.
If he's kept, I would bet that he'll almost definitely be extended. The Sox have generally indicated that they're averse to having a lame-duck manager (because it's an unnecessary distraction), so he'd be extended for another year even if the Sox have no interest in keeping him for 2019.
 

LoweTek

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 30, 2005
2,183
Central Florida
JF did not make base running errors; 20, 22, 23 and 24 year old rookie or near-rookie players did. Are you guys forgetting how young this team is? They overachieved! JF's influence on the overall outcome was neutral at worst. Rookies make mental mistakes. The suggestion nobody is talking about it afterward is highly unlikely. I'd bet every one of those blunders was used as a teaching moment for these guys, in the clubhouse - not in the dugout. You don't see too many rookie and near-rookie players who are accomplished base runners. It is a learned skill and mistakes will precede competence in every case. What you saw on the bases was perfectly normal for players so young.

It's also normal for rookies to throw to the wrong base a few times or to rush a play and throw the ball to the photographers.

As for Price, he has always been a bit of a d*ck. Remember his twitter antics with David Ortiz when Price was still with Tampa? He even enlisted his girlfriend at the time to join the twit war. Beaning a guy in June for some perceived slight from the previous October and then whining about it?

What Eck said about ERod was benign as well as true. I was watching the game. "Yuck" was kind. Price was being Price making an incident out of it. I have a hard time believing a large portion of the team has problems with the usually well founded, reasonable and accurate comments made by Eck on broadcasts. Price's inability to handle criticism is well known. It's not Eck's job to kiss Price's or any player's ass. And how do we know nobody apologized to Eck for the incident? It's not something I'd expect a well managed clubhouse to make public either way.

None of these things has anything to do with nor are they a negative reflection on JF.

I know the wound is fresh but this team was not quite good enough and was getting tired and hurt toward the end. Taking this series from Houston was going to require over-achievement nearly throughout the roster, offensively and defensively. It was not happening. Nagging injuries and an opponent with multiple established stars peaking at the right time of the season; they were the better team and would have had to fail themselves to lose this series to the Red Sox.

I'm neutral on the impact of JF but regardless, there is no way the SoSH vantage point provides enough information to judge. In-game and press conferences is all we have. There is a lot more to it. Someone correctly observed earlier we rely 80% on what we can see. Management (e.g. Dombrowski) relies 80% on what we can't see.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
I’ve provided plenty of evidence on other points that have been backed up by other posters as well. Let me ask you something? Would the Red Sox have won their legendary back to back AL east titles without Farrell? I’d say yes. As far as people worshipping him I can just point to half of the posts on this thread that are treating him as this great manager because he won 93 games and won his back to back division titles.
You keep asking this and it's fucking nonsensical. They won them with Farrell, not with someone else. Hypotheticals about imaginary managers tell us nothing.

And go ahead and quote the posts where people are worshiping him. We'll wait.
 

drbretto

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 10, 2009
12,078
Concord, NH
JF did not make base running errors; 20, 22, 23 and 24 year old rookie or near-rookie players did. Are you guys forgetting how young this team is?
You don't just magically learn how to run the bases better. Someone has to teach you. That's very much keeping in mind how young these players are. If they don't get some instruction, they will spend the rest of their careers sucking on the basepaths.

Farrell doesn't believe there's a baserunning problem at all, so he's essentially reinforcing their bad habits rather than taking steps to fix them.
 

drbretto

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 10, 2009
12,078
Concord, NH
What makes you think they are not getting the instruction? Or am I misreading your implication?
Farrell's own comments specifically regarding the baserunning. He doesn't think there's a problem in the first place, despite letting them run into outs at third in situations where it's far more important to stay conservative on the basepaths. Instead of looking into how to make the team better, he just made excuses.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
You don't just magically learn how to run the bases better. Someone has to teach you. That's very much keeping in mind how young these players are. If they don't get some instruction, they will spend the rest of their careers sucking on the basepaths.
We're just supposed to take it for granted that they were a bad base running team?

Their team Spd rating is 4.5 on the year. Tied for 9th and about average on the scale developed by Bill James.

Their UBR (ultimate base running) is 1.4 which is pretty neutral, and 17th in the majors. So, fairly middle of the pack.

Their wGDP (weighted grounded into double plays) is -0.5, again roughly neutral... and 16th in the majors.

And wSB (weighted stolen bases) was 4.5, 6th in the majors.

That looks like a roughly average base running team that was above average at stealing bases.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
You keep asking this and it's fucking nonsensical. They won them with Farrell, not with someone else. Hypotheticals about imaginary managers tell us nothing.

And go ahead and quote the posts where people are worshiping him. We'll wait.
I don’t have to. I can just go back to your posts on this thread where it seems like you should be the president of the John Farrell defender fan club. You never answered my initial question. Does John Farrell make this team better? And if so how?
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
I don’t have to. I can just go back to your posts on this thread where it seems like you should be the president of the John Farrell defender fan club. You never answered my initial question. Does John Farrell make this team better? And if so how?
Didn't think so. Start backing up your arguments or please stop polluting the board with your crap.

Edit: Not trying to moderate. Just voicing my opinion that you are dragging the level of discourse on the main board way down.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
Didn't think so. Start backing up your arguments or please stop polluting the board with your crap.
I don’t have time to quote all of your posts. Just answer the question instead of making it semi personal. Does John Farrell make the Red Sox a better team? If so how? Because I can’t see how a manager who leaves pitchers in too long, pitches guys with bad road splits and plays a .200 hitter in the playoffs over someone who can hit lefties is someone who can make this team better.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,069
Hingham, MA
We're just supposed to take it for granted that they were a bad base running team?

Their team Spd rating is 4.5 on the year. Tied for 9th and about average on the scale developed by Bill James.

Their UBR (ultimate base running) is 1.4 which is pretty neutral, and 17th in the majors. So, fairly middle of the pack.

Their wGDP (weighted grounded into double plays) is -0.5, again roughly neutral... and 16th in the majors.

And wSB (weighted stolen bases) was 4.5, 6th in the majors.

That looks like a roughly average base running team that was above average at stealing bases.
Not sure what those stats tell us, but situations matter, and anecdotally they made the 1st or 3rd out at 3rd way more than they should have, and in general just had a metric ton of horrible baserunning mistakes. I get the aggressive approach, but they were dumb as fuck a lot of times, and that has to fall on the manager.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
Not sure what those stats tell us, but situations matter, and anecdotally they made the 1st or 3rd out at 3rd way more than they should have, and in general just had a metric ton of horrible baserunning mistakes. I get the aggressive approach, but they were dumb as fuck a lot of times, and that has to fall on the manager.
Correct. I’ll give this team the benefit of the doubt with base running. They’re young. But someone has to teach them. Otherwise they never reach their full potential. Who would that fall on?

Team was average on the basepaths which is why I never necessarily held that against Farrell. My axe to grind with base running is that Butterfield should never be allowed to coach 3rd in a Sox uniform
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
Not sure what those stats tell us, but situations matter, and anecdotally they made the 1st or 3rd out at 3rd way more than they should have, and in general just had a metric ton of horrible baserunning mistakes. I get the aggressive approach, but they were dumb as fuck a lot of times, and that has to fall on the manager.
So you're tossing the stats out the window because it felt like they were a bad base running team?
 

drbretto

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 10, 2009
12,078
Concord, NH
We're just supposed to take it for granted that they were a bad base running team?

Their team Spd rating is 4.5 on the year. Tied for 9th and about average on the scale developed by Bill James.

Their UBR (ultimate base running) is 1.4 which is pretty neutral, and 17th in the majors. So, fairly middle of the pack.

Their wGDP (weighted grounded into double plays) is -0.5, again roughly neutral... and 16th in the majors.

And wSB (weighted stolen bases) was 4.5, 6th in the majors.

That looks like a roughly average base running team that was above average at stealing bases.

Honest question: Did you watch any of the games this year or do you just think you can answer this question with numbers? None of what you just posted is relevant here. It's about the boneheaded plays that lacked situational awareness. There is no context in those numbers. That's nearly as useless as saying Farrell did fine because they won 93 games. That doesn't tell you anything.

There were several observable moments where the game was on the line and a runner made an ill advised attempt to get an unnecessary extra base. When asked about it in the post game, Farrell expressed complete ignorance of the situation and just waived it off as something that happens when you're aggressive on the basepaths, rather than anything about whether or not it was smart to go in the first place. The question isn't whether or not they are bad baserunners. The question is whether or not Farrell is making them better or worse.

This has been covered several times in these threads, too. From the people that are giving you the rational evidence you keep claiming doesn't exist. Instead, you're sticking like glue to Tyrone because he's coming off as the most unreasonable, and thereby easiest to argue against, but I'm still convinced you haven't read this thread. Especially since you seem to be under the impression that you're speaking for the majority here.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
[QUOTE="drbretto, post: 2486086, member: 62121]

This has been covered several times in these threads, too. From the people that are giving you the rational evidence you keep claiming doesn't exist. Instead, you're sticking like glue to Tyrone because he's coming off as the most unreasonable, and thereby easiest to argue against, but I'm still convinced you haven't read this thread. Especially since you seem to be under the impression that you're speaking for the majority here.[/QUOTE]

Hey I just want him to tell me how Farrell makes this team better. I just have a different way of voicing that question I guess. Because I’ve went through post after post and I still don’t see how Farrell makes this team any better. If not then you move on to someone who possibly can.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,069
Hingham, MA
So you're tossing the stats out the window because it felt like they were a bad base running team?
I have never heard of Team Speed or Ultimate Base Running. These are not common stats, they are not even common advanced stats. If you explain what they are and how they are calculated, I would have a better understanding.

Honest question: Did you watch any of the games this year or do you just think you can answer this question with numbers? None of what you just posted is relevant here. It's about the boneheaded plays that lacked situational awareness. There is no context in those numbers. That's nearly as useless as saying Farrell did fine because they won 93 games. That doesn't tell you anything.

There were several observable moments where the game was on the line and a runner made an ill advised attempt to get an unnecessary extra base. When asked about it in the post game, Farrell expressed complete ignorance of the situation and just waived it off as something that happens when you're aggressive on the basepaths, rather than anything about whether or not it was smart to go in the first place. The question isn't whether or not they are bad baserunners. The question is whether or not Farrell is making them better or worse.

This has been covered several times in these threads, too. From the people that are giving you the rational evidence you keep claiming doesn't exist. Instead, you're sticking like glue to Tyrone because he's coming off as the most unreasonable, and thereby easiest to argue against, but I'm still convinced you haven't read this thread. Especially since you seem to be under the impression that you're speaking for the majority here.
But yeah basically this. Too many bad outs from a situational perspective. Being aggressive and getting thrown out on occasion is ok. Being aggressive and making the 1st or 3rd out at 3rd, getting gunned down at the plate by half the baseline, getting thrown out trying to gain an extra base when a runner is trying to score and nearly costing the team a run (see Game 1)... that is awful baserunning.

Edit: I have no idea what GIDP or SB% have to do with baserunning either. I'm not talking about either. I am talking about baserunning decisions on balls in play. I am very much in favor of stats and data when it comes to baseball. I'm not Cafardo. But when you watch them play, they make a ridiculous amount of boneheaded baserunning decisions.
 

drbretto

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 10, 2009
12,078
Concord, NH
[QUOTE="drbretto, post: 2486086, member: 62121]

This has been covered several times in these threads, too. From the people that are giving you the rational evidence you keep claiming doesn't exist. Instead, you're sticking like glue to Tyrone because he's coming off as the most unreasonable, and thereby easiest to argue against, but I'm still convinced you haven't read this thread. Especially since you seem to be under the impression that you're speaking for the majority here.
Hey I just want him to tell me how Farrell makes this team better. I just have a different way of voicing that question I guess. Because I’ve went through post after post and I still don’t see how Farrell makes this team any better.[/QUOTE]

I agree with you overall, don't get me wrong. I'm saying that Snod is ignoring a shitload of evidence and just sticking on you because you're being more argumentative or whatever. I don't mean that as an insult to you, BTW, regardless of how that sounds. It was against him, not you.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
[QUOTE="drbretto, post: 2486086, member: 62121]

This has been covered several times in these threads, too. From the people that are giving you the rational evidence you keep claiming doesn't exist. Instead, you're sticking like glue to Tyrone because he's coming off as the most unreasonable, and thereby easiest to argue against, but I'm still convinced you haven't read this thread. Especially since you seem to be under the impression that you're speaking for the majority here.
Hey I just want him to tell me how Farrell makes this team better. I just have a different way of voicing that question I guess. Because I’ve went through post after post and I still don’t see how Farrell makes this team any better. If not then you move on to someone who possibly can.[/QUOTE]

I agree with a lot of the criticism of Farrell but, other than Tito, he's still probably the best manager the team has had since I started watching them 30 years ago. So I think there's more risk to moving on than the bolded suggests.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,069
Hingham, MA
From my view, Farrell's supporters basically stop at "he may not help the team, but he doesn't hurt it" and "someone else may be worse". Is anyone arguing anything more forceful than that in Farrell's favor?
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
Honest question: Did you watch any of the games this year or do you just think you can answer this question with numbers? None of what you just posted is relevant here. It's about the boneheaded plays that lacked situational awareness. There is no context in those numbers. That's nearly as useless as saying Farrell did fine because they won 93 games. That doesn't tell you anything.

There were several observable moments where the game was on the line and a runner made an ill advised attempt to get an unnecessary extra base. When asked about it in the post game, Farrell expressed complete ignorance of the situation and just waived it off as something that happens when you're aggressive on the basepaths, rather than anything about whether or not it was smart to go in the first place. The question isn't whether or not they are bad baserunners. The question is whether or not Farrell is making them better or worse.

This has been covered several times in these threads, too. From the people that are giving you the rational evidence you keep claiming doesn't exist. Instead, you're sticking like glue to Tyrone because he's coming off as the most unreasonable, and thereby easiest to argue against, but I'm still convinced you haven't read this thread. Especially since you seem to be under the impression that you're speaking for the majority here.
You're assuming that the Red Sox are the only team with bone headed plays on the base paths that stand out. You don't watch other teams like you watch the Sox, so you don't get to see all the times other base runners do the same stupid shit. The stats I posted don't jive with the repeated claim that this was a bad base running team. Doubling down on your perception being worth more than the numbers isn't a valid argument against the numbers. It just reinforces that lack of rationality on display here.

On the season this team was a middle of the pack base running team and an above average base stealing team. Insisting that's not true doesn't make it so.

And tims4wins, Fangraphs has a glossary that explains each one. That you aren't familiar with them does not have an impact on their value. But if you want something more commonly know, the Sox were tied for the 4th highest rate of successful steals in the majors at 77%. Only the Yankees (80%), Indians (79%) and Washington (78%) were better.

If you want to convince me they were a bad base running team, you'll (any of you) need a better argument than "I remember a bunch of mistakes!"
 

czar

fanboy
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
4,312
Ann Arbor
Honest question: Did you watch any of the games this year or do you just think you can answer this question with numbers? None of what you just posted is relevant here. It's about the boneheaded plays that lacked situational awareness. There is no context in those numbers. That's nearly as useless as saying Farrell did fine because they won 93 games. That doesn't tell you anything.
Not to pick on you, but this is an incredibly stupid argument. It's akin to the old "your fancy OBP numbers don't matter because I'm a real fan who actually watches the games" stuff people used to post in 2000.

If you don't think Snod's aggregate stats are valid b/c they don't properly weight the 100% of the time Sox runners were thrown out going 1st-to-3rd with two outs, then counter them in some logical and/or rational way, don't hide behind "I watched the games, you didn't, your facts mean nothing!"
 

drbretto

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 10, 2009
12,078
Concord, NH
You're assuming that the Red Sox are the only team with bone headed plays on the base paths that stand out.
No, no no. I am specifically referring to Farrell's comments about those bonehead plays. Specifically how he reacted to them. No other context required there. Objectively bad decision, poo-pooed. Young players learn the wrong thing. Nothing is corrected. This happened multiple times.

This isn't that hard.

Not to pick on you, but this is an incredibly stupid argument. It's akin to the old "your fancy OBP numbers don't matter because I'm a real fan who actually watches the games" stuff people used to post in 2000.

If you don't think Snod's aggregate stats are valid b/c they don't properly weight the 100% of the time Sox runners were thrown out going 1st-to-3rd with two outs, then counter them in some logical and/or rational way, don't hide behind "I watched the games, you didn't, your facts mean nothing!"

Continue reading, and you'll find what you seek. I did not stop there.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
From my view, Farrell's supporters basically stop at "he may not help the team, but he doesn't hurt it" and "someone else may be worse". Is anyone arguing anything more forceful than that in Farrell's favor?
It's on the people arguing for a change to make a compelling case, not the other way around. Most of us are just pointing out the flaws in the positions being taken. Again, if there's an obvious upgrade out there, great. If not, you better have be able to make a good face for firing him and I still haven't seen anything all that compelling.

Lot's of emotional and anecdotal ranting, plenty of projecting and more than little making assumptions that aren't necessarily supported by the information we do have (talk of losing control of the clubhouse, for instance... it's pure projection). Where statistical evidence does exist, it seems to support the idea that Farrell is not, in fact, a bad manager.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
Hey I just want him to tell me how Farrell makes this team better. I just have a different way of voicing that question I guess. Because I’ve went through post after post and I still don’t see how Farrell makes this team any better. If not then you move on to someone who possibly can.
I agree with a lot of the criticism of Farrell but, other than Tito, he's still probably the best manager the team has had since I started watching them 30 years ago. So I think there's more risk to moving on than the bolded suggests.[/QUOTE]

Sure. I can agree with that. But let’s look at who we have to choose from since the 90s? Joe Morgan, Butch Hobson, Kevin Kennedy, Jimy Williams, Grady Little, Joe Kerrigan, Valentine. Aside from Tito and Farrell It’s not exactly a whose who of managerial talent.

I’m not even claiming that Farrell is an awful manager. I just believe he’s peaked as manager of this team. They could make a bad hire next and go back to an 80 win team or they could hire the next Tito or Maddon. But one thing for sure is that we can expect more results like this season and last year if they keep Farrell.
 

LoweTek

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 30, 2005
2,183
Central Florida
There were several observable moments where the game was on the line and a runner made an ill advised attempt to get an unnecessary extra base. When asked about it in the post game, Farrell expressed complete ignorance of the situation and just waived it off as something that happens when you're aggressive on the basepaths, rather than anything about whether or not it was smart to go in the first place. The question isn't whether or not they are bad baserunners. The question is whether or not Farrell is making them better or worse.
I'm not sure what you expect JF to say when asked about a bad base running play. I'd suggest perhaps he was avoiding being publicly critical of a young and developing player rather than he was in denial somehow.

What's the alternative? "Yeah Shank, that was a pretty stupid move by Devers. Cost us the game. We've been trying to break him of the habit."

Forget it. Will not happen.

I watched those games too and you're right. There were plenty of mistakes. I just would not agree the manager needs to acknowledge or criticize them in the context of a post-game press conference. As a rule, you name names when there's something positive to acknowledge and avoid names when it's negative. No player wants to hear a manager be critical at any opportunity. See Bobby V for those services. It gets you no where as a leader or manager.

Again, I'm 1,000% sure the mistakes were discussed and instruction happened. Just not in front of the press or the cameras.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
I agree with a lot of the criticism of Farrell but, other than Tito, he's still probably the best manager the team has had since I started watching them 30 years ago. So I think there's more risk to moving on than the bolded suggests.
Sure. I can agree with that. But let’s look at who we have to choose from since the 90s? Joe Morgan, Butch Hobson, Kevin Kennedy, Jimy Williams, Grady Little, Joe Kerrigan, Valentine. Aside from Tito and Farrell It’s not exactly a whose who of managerial talent.

I’m not even claiming that Farrell is an awful manager. I just believe he’s peaked as manager of this team. They could make a bad hire next and go back to an 80 win team or they could hire the next Tito or Maddon. But one thing for sure is that we can expect more results like this season and last year if they keep Farrell.[/QUOTE]

I mean.....thats sort of my point. The hurdle of "not adding or taking away anything from the team" actually seems like kind of a high one based on history.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,069
Hingham, MA
And tims4wins, Fangraphs has a glossary that explains each one. That you aren't familiar with them does not have an impact on their value. But if you want something more commonly know, the Sox were tied for the 4th highest rate of successful steals in the majors at 77%. Only the Yankees (80%), Indians (79%) and Washington (78%) were better.

If you want to convince me they were a bad base running team, you'll (any of you) need a better argument than "I remember a bunch of mistakes!"
Again, stolen base % has nothing to do with what I am talking about.

UBR I am looking into and makes some sense, as apparently it takes into context in terms of base / out state and expected runs. Still unsure though if it weights the proper penalty for running into say the 1st or 3rd out at 3rd base, but it at least hints they might be an average base running team.

Do they track UBR by player? If so, I would be particularly curious in Benintendi. He seems like a putrid baserunner who never improved.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
26,993
Newton
From my view, Farrell's supporters basically stop at "he may not help the team, but he doesn't hurt it" and "someone else may be worse". Is anyone arguing anything more forceful than that in Farrell's favor?
Bobby Valentine says hi. "Someone may be worse" is not a bad reason to keep him.

A few things I have on my mind:
  1. B2B AL East Titles. I have now heard multiple iterations of "People are saying the titles are a reason to keep him." It's not true. This all goes back to one poster on the game thread in game 2 saying, "Hey, say what you will about Farrell, but Tito never did that." That's all, that's it. One poster. Nothing else. So can we please stop the straw man stuff?
  2. Player Opinion. Is Farrell respected? Tolerated? Disliked? McAdam suggests DD regularly would upbraid him behind closed doors about tactical decisions with players outside being able to hear it. Did anyone ask Papi on FS1?
  3. Affair. How big of a deal was the thing with Farrell dating the sideline reporter for NESN? I've now heard multiple mentions of that the last few days -- including one in which apparently a former player or coach w the team said something to the effect of "I imagine that it's for him." I don't remember that being a particularly big deal -- but was there a larger kerfuffle behind it that sowed bad blood with the team?
  4. Fait Accompli? ESPN said last night that Farrell "might have been managing his last game for the Red Sox." I was actually a bit surprised to hear a national publication say that outright. How much are beat reporters expecting him to be canned?
 

absintheofmalaise

too many flowers
Dope
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2005
23,347
The gran facenda
I have never heard of Team Speed or Ultimate Base Running. These are not common stats, they are not even common advanced stats. If you explain what they are and how they are calculated, I would have a better understanding.

But yeah basically this. Too many bad outs from a situational perspective. Being aggressive and getting thrown out on occasion is ok. Being aggressive and making the 1st or 3rd out at 3rd, getting gunned down at the plate by half the baseline, getting thrown out trying to gain an extra base when a runner is trying to score and nearly costing the team a run (see Game 1)... that is awful baserunning.
.
UBR has been around for around 6 years on Fangraphs. I believe they use it in their WAR calculations too. Czar can correct me on that if I'm wrong.
 

czar

fanboy
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
4,312
Ann Arbor
Continue reading, and you'll find what you seek. I did not stop there.
I know. If the rest of the post is what you cite then we're just not going to get on the same page, because (completely paraphrasing, I know) saying "lots of times Farrell was bad" just isn't going to change my mind. I want some, any concrete evidence. If the argument is going to be "you didn't watch the games" or "numbers can't help you with this one" then I'm just not going to get there.

It's kind of like if I said "Chris Sale sucked in 2017," everyone else said "wha? you drunk!" and I said "I remember lots of times he made bad pitches this year." Yes, somewhat hyperbolic, but I would hope everyone would take me to task for that statement.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,069
Hingham, MA
It's on the people arguing for a change to make a compelling case, not the other way around. Most of us are just pointing out the flaws in the positions being taken. Again, if there's an obvious upgrade out there, great. If not, you better have be able to make a good face for firing him and I still haven't seen anything all that compelling.

Lot's of emotional and anecdotal ranting, plenty of projecting and more than little making assumptions that aren't necessarily supported by the information we do have (talk of losing control of the clubhouse, for instance... it's pure projection). Where statistical evidence does exist, it seems to support the idea that Farrell is not, in fact, a bad manager.
Go read my first post in this thread. It was a couple hours ago. I said bringing JF back would be defensible. I personally would prefer that he is fired for my personal enjoyment of Red Sox baseball, but I would understand why they would bring him back. I don't think we have a totally different POV here. But that said, I don't think JF has any huge support here, seems more like neutral at best. Do you disagree with that? I'm not arguing about who has the burden of proof here. Just that his most ardent supporters seem lukewarm at best.
 

drbretto

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 10, 2009
12,078
Concord, NH
I'm not sure what you expect JF to say when asked about a bad base running play. I'd suggest perhaps he was avoiding being publicly critical of a young and developing player rather than he was in denial somehow.
I swear to god, no offense, but we've reached the point of the thread where people are showing up late, skipping the first few pages and I'm going to have to just keep on repeating myself. This was covered, in detail, multiple times. Your supposition does not fit what actually happened. When he was asked about it, he jsut doubled down on his baserunning philosophy. Being aggressive on the basepaths was the plan. And, btw, a good plan. But the problem was that he had no regard for the game situation, and doubled down on that when pressed for answers. This isn't a single incident, either. And it's not the only rational example that's been put out there.

This thread has hit its tipping point. If anyone is still confused about my stance on anything, feel free to go back and read the thread. I don't think I have anything else to add at this point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.