Second Guesser's Club - Drew: The Reboot.

[glennhoffmania]

Farrell is obviously a smart, impressive man, but his in-game decisions remain baffling. He has far more of these than Tito did. It's so bizarre.

 
I was basically thinking the same exact thing the other night.  While Tito frustrated me often with some of his in-game decisions I could usually see some logic behind the move.  With Farrell, I try to give him the benefit of the doubt but some of the things he does seem pretty indefensible.  The pen management, the bunting, the pinch hitting decisions, the lineup construction- there seems to be a lot of questionable moves.

 

[rembrat]

The smart, impressive part or the baffling decisions? On the first one, I think the big difference he made last year was coming in, telling the players there would be no politics or bullshit and to just go play ball. He was a forthright, decent, almost fatherly figure type of leader that all the troops got behind.They happily responded, but of course some of it was, compared with Bobby V, just about anybody would have been an improvement. As for smart, In post game interviews, he sounds OK, but his points are always pretty obvious. "Lester had all his pitches working, both sides of the plate and could use any in any count." He sounds like most other managers.
 
As for Farrell vs. Tito, I remember a lot of "Francoma" usage in 2004, until the Sox turned it around in late July. I think, today, Tito is 
 
For in game decision making, what manager is better, or worse? OK, gun to head, or if I had big money on games, I'd absolutely rather Bochy, Melvin, Maddon, and yes, Tito making late game moves for my team. Maybe (yuk) Showalter and Girardi also. One difference with all those guys is they have significantly more experience than Farrell. I really don't see a lot of any other managers. Well, Mattingly just doesn't appear to be that bright and I wouldn't trust him.
 
One thing, I wish Farrell made a point of guys working on bunting more in spring training. I'm not a big fan of it, but if you're going to use it, major leaguers have be able to do it. The Red Sox as a team are pathetic at it.

 
I was just wondering how Farrell in 11 months could have surpassed a guy whose tenure ran for 7 years in bonehead decisions. Although, SJH could have been compairing their first 2 seasons as managers but if that's the case then it certainly wasn't clear. 
 
To your last point, that's not really Farrell's job, is it? Organizations go about developing baseball players differently. They'll put emphasis on pounding the strikezone or being patient at the plate, etc. Now, just from my perspective it seems like the Red Sox don't really stress bunting in their system. So asking Farrell to make his guys go through extra rounds of bunting in SP in the hopes that they pick up a skill that takes years to develop is akin to Bobby Valentine and his EVERYONE MUST BE DOING SOMETHING IN SPRING TRAINING AND AS A RESULT WE ARE GOING TO RUN THE BASES MORE SMARTLY crap that didn't work.
 
So then you say, if they can't bunt why does he call for bunts? The same reason a manager will use a crap pitcher.. because that's what his GM has made available for him to use.
 
But yes, Farrell should have pulled Peavy quicker. I agree with this.

 

[absintheofmalaise]

Nava sighting!!
 
Holt 1B
Bogaerts 3B
Pedroia 2B
Ortiz DH
Pierzynski C
Sizemore RF
Drew SS
Nava LF
Bradley Jr. CF
Workman RHP

 

[pokey_reese]

 
To your last point, that's not really Farrell's job, is it? Organizations go about developing baseball players differently. They'll put emphasis on pounding the strikezone or being patient at the plate, etc. Now, just from my perspective it seems like the Red Sox don't really stress bunting in their system. So asking Farrell to make his guys go through extra rounds of bunting in SP in the hopes that they pick up a skill that takes years to develop is akin to Bobby Valentine and his EVERYONE MUST BE DOING SOMETHING IN SPRING TRAINING AND AS A RESULT WE ARE GOING TO RUN THE BASES MORE SMARTLY crap that didn't work.
 
So then you say, if they can't bunt why does he call for bunts? The same reason a manager will use a crap pitcher.. because that's what his GM has made available for him to use.

I agree that learning to bunt isn't necessarily something that they will just get good at in a ST, but they have all been playing baseball for life, so it isn't like they had never done it before, either.
 
I do take issue with the bolded section, though, and I don't think the analogy holds.  These aren't bad players overall.  If you had a pitcher who had a great fastball and a great change, but a terrible curve, would you want the manager to keep insisting that he throw the curve?  The point of a manager is to take the pieces he is given and maximize their value by using their strengths. 
 
Use what you are given. if I decide that I really want to make spaghetti for dinner, and find out that my girlfriend went shopping and bought all of the ingredients to make Beef Burgundy, and I still decide to make spaghetti and it's terrible, is that her fault or mine?
 
edit:  I might feel differently if he were bunting in the very rare situations where it isn't completely inane.

 

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

Farrell isn't being helped by his bullpen, either. 
 
I agreed with the criticism up thread that he should have pulled Peavy earlier, but then he makes the smart move and pulls Workman at the first sign of trouble and what happens? Capuano completely shits the bed. 
 
He knew he had a fresh pen and a day off coming up and he got aggressive, trying to use the team's strength to get a win when up. Then it totally backfired. Sometimes the manager makes the right move and gets burned. 

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Sometimes the manager makes the right move and gets burned. 

 
I've just been reading the Shank/Francona bio for the first time, and there's a great moment in there where when they first courted Francona they told him something like "we'll never judge your decisions by their outcomes." Which sounds nutty on the face of it, but is absolutely right.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Farrell isn't being helped by his bullpen, either. 
 
I agreed with the criticism up thread that he should have pulled Peavy earlier, but then he makes the smart move and pulls Workman at the first sign of trouble and what happens? Capuano completely shits the bed. 
 
He knew he had a fresh pen and a day off coming up and he got aggressive, trying to use the team's strength to get a win when up. Then it totally backfired. Sometimes the manager makes the right move and gets burned. 

 
I don't think he's being criticized for pulling Workman when he did. He got criticized for leaving Peavy out there too long despite a rested bullpen and a tie game. That was a bad decision which led to a bad outcome. Pulling Workman was a good decision that led to a bad outcome.

 

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

 
I don't think he's being criticized for pulling Workman when he did. He got criticized for leaving Peavy out there too long despite a rested bullpen and a tie game. That was a bad decision which led to a bad outcome. Pulling Workman was a good decision that led to a bad outcome.

 
Yes. I thought that's exactly what I said.