The Rockies’ swap of Clint Hurdle for Jim Tracy in 2009 (along with the Marlins’ own Jeff Torborg/Jack McKeon switch in their World Series-winning 2003 campaign) is exactly what a team hopes for when it fires a manager early in the season. The Rockies turned their season around under Tracy and made the playoffs after an amazing stretch run.
But the Hurdle/Tracy swap could also be read as evidence of how difficult it can be to identify or predict a manager’s effect on a team.
...a team’s performance is informed by any number of factors that have little to do with its manager.
...Some teams’ manager swaps appear to have worked well, like that of the Rockies, or the Athletics’ switch of Geren and Melvin. Others didn’t, although that’s not surprising, given that teams who fire their managers tend not to be the best ones.
I have been mulling over a post to this effect for days. Though the offense is not Chili's fault, it is his responsibility. And while the bats have underperformed as a unit, I struggle to identify even one who player has overperformed as a hitter. I don't buy that he doesn't have ample time to put out all of the fires as he has an assistant in Rodriguez. Somehow, Pedroia finds the time despite his other duties to make breakthroughs with guys like Napoli and Hanley. If the first two months of the season are about evaluating, then Davis should be relieved of his duties and replaced on June 1st. The question becomes the most likely successor, whether an internal candidate like Gedman or Hyers, or another one of Farrell's cronies from his Cleveland days.MikeM said:If you are going to have already axed the pitching coach for not getting adequate production out of a group that was (realistically) rather suspect to begin with, i don't know how Chili ends up getting a pass here.
pjheff said:I have been mulling over a post to this effect for days. Though the offense is not Chili's fault, it is his responsibility. And while the bats have underperformed as a unit, I struggle to identify even one who player has overperformed as a hitter. I don't buy that he doesn't have ample time to put out all of the fires as he has an assistant in Rodriguez. Somehow, Pedroia finds the time despite his other duties to make breakthroughs with guys like Napoli and Hanley. If the first two months of the season are about evaluating, then Davis should be relieved of his duties and replaced on June 1st. The question becomes the most likely successor, whether an internal candidate like Gedman or Hyers, or another one of Farrell's cronies from his Cleveland days.
With all the caveats about how these are decent points good luck pitching that. Punting seasons before June starts is incredibly risky business. If Papi continues in his funk they need another bat. They probably need another bat anyway if Papi does regain some semblance of decency.Toe Nash said:Sox are now 22-28. If you assume the AL East remains weak and no one else puts it together, what will it take, 87 wins to take the division? That would be the fewest wins by a division winner since 2009. But OK.
To get to 87 wins they need to go 65-47 for the rest of the year, a 93-win pace. Do we think they have that in them? To get to 90 wins they need a 98-win pace. It's becoming late early.
The FO needs to honestly decide if they want to make a run. If they don't, I'm fine playing for next year -- theoretically, the many players new to the league will have adjusted (either to the AL or to MLB in general) and should be a lot better. You trade everyone who's not part of the future and you maybe try to land a real pitcher who can get Ks in the offseason and make sure your team can play defense.
But you also need to decide if the current coaching staff is the group who can help these players make the needed adjustments. From here, it's not clear they can and you don't want the same thing next year.
What would you say is working right now?DanoooME said:
Some of the folks on this board want to change things more often than their underwear. It's getting ridiculous. When the only constant is change, you'll never get a handle on what's working and what isn't because the bars are always moving.
InsideTheParker said:So many of the Sox are always swinging for the fences. They don't bunt or go to the opposite field enough, so they are continually hitting into the shift, resulting in many double plays. It has looked as tho one has sat them down and talked about hitting as a team, about making things happen on the bases. I have seen many less powerful NL line-ups looking incredibly better than the Sox do now, just taking their singles and accumulating runs. Heck, even the powerful Arod, down 3-2 last night in the first, just flicked a pitch beyond the second baseman. Of course he's a very talented hitter, but he got that hit because he didn't try to pull the ball, got on base and moved the runners along. The Red Sox seem dumb in this area. I wonder if the older batters don't listen to Davis. Has his history of success been with younger hitters? Didn't Manny try to go the opposite way when he was in a slump? Didn't Ortiz? I thought that Remy used to say that Napoli shortened up and tried to go oppo when he was down 3-2. I'm not seeing much of that approach this year, and the opposition managers are taking advantage. They see little effort to evade the shift, so they pitch accordingly.
There has been some idea though (in these threads, don't know if Farrell or Chili have said it) that pitchers are more aggressive with first pitch strikes with the Sox because they know the Sox like to run up pitch counts. Results are Sox get behind, to too many two strike counts in which pitchers dominate. So, they may be swinging earlier in the count to try something, anything to get out of the funk. Also, first pitch "get it in" fastballs are common and maybe the most hittable pitch a guy is going to get. Other teams I watch guys swing at first pitches a lot. Nomar did good with that approach. Sox are at the point where they're trying anything and everything.75cent bleacher seat said:It seems the Sox were swinging at many 1st pitches last night, something I'll play closer attention to in today's game. I agree with comments regarding hitters swinging for the fence far too often...With that in mind and Farrell seemingly okay with it I have to wonder what Ben's thoughts are and if any conversation has taken place between the two. Certainly we aren't the only ones to notice.
If I were hired to improve an offense, and given two major free acquisitions to assist in that process, then that unit's regression under my three months of leadership, including a historically inept May, would justify my removal, my past performance in other markets notwithstanding.DanoooME said:And Chili has only had a few months to work with this entire team. If you were only doing your job for a few months and still trying to get up to speed on it, don't you think you deserve an opportunity to do the job right? Chili also has a reputation as an excellent hitting coach, so doesn't that deserve a little more slack.
When you're talking "regression," though, who are you talking about? Ortiz is arguably the only regular counted on to be a big producer who fell into a ditch and hasn't shown much ability to get out of it.pjheff said:If I were hired to improve an offense, and given two major free acquisitions to assist in that process, then that unit's regression under my three months of leadership, including a historically inept May, would justify my removal, my past performance in other markets notwithstanding.
pjheff said:If I were hired to improve an offense, and given two major free acquisitions to assist in that process, then that unit's regression under my three months of leadership, including a historically inept May, would justify my removal, my past performance in other markets notwithstanding.
Sox are also next to last in AL team strikeouts. Houston is first with 458, Sox have 321 and KC 267. There goes that theory (getting behind and striking out too much). So WTF is wrong? 64 kabillion dollar question.kieckeredinthehead said:They swung at the first pitch in five of their 36 plate appearances.
Edit: that's lower than their season average of swinging at the first pitch in 25% of PAs
I used the word "unit," because I'm referring to to the collective Red Sox team offense that is responsible for scoring runs so as to win baseball games. We can parse individual performances if you like -- my feeling is that we expected little from catcher this year, not from DH, RF, and 1B -- but the team has posted a historically bad 79 runs or 2.8 runs per game in May, regressing from an unspectacular offense in April.P'tucket said:When you're talking "regression," though, who are you talking about?
This offense has already managed the shitty performances and downward spiral that you fear a coaching change will induce.DanoooME said:Eventually you'll end up paying millions of dollars per year for guys no longer working in the organization and the philosophy will change so often the players will get more confused and continue on a downward spiral. Teams that constantly change coaching staffs and managers have one thing in common: they all consistently have shitty performances.
The point of my post is that "unit" isn't a useful way to analyze a coach's performance. He works with "players," and not nearly as many of them are underperforming realistic expectations by as radical a margin as we might think at first blush. To be honest, aside from the Sandoval signing, I don't know that there's much else I would have done differently than BC during the offseason in terms of lineup construction given the existing contracts on the roster, salary constraints, etc. I just think that expectations were overblown.pjheff said:I used the word "unit," because I'm referring to to the collective Red Sox team offense that is responsible for scoring runs so as to win baseball games. We can parse individual performances if you like -- my feeling is that we expected little from catcher this year, not from DH, RF, and 1B -- but the team has posted a historically bad 79 runs or 2.8 runs per game in May, regressing from an unspectacular offense in April.
Al Zarilla said:Sox are also next to last in AL team strikeouts. Houston is first with 458, Sox have 321 and KC 267. There goes that theory (getting behind and striking out too much). So WTF is wrong? 64 kabillion dollar question.
The latter should even out over time, the former. who knows.Savin Hillbilly said:
They're dead last in MLB in BABIP, a full 25 points below the AL average of .292, even though they play in a park that should theoretically goose BABIP. They're also tied for 13th in ISO. Fenway giveth and taketh away in that latter department, but a Red Sox team that's hitting the ball hard shouldn't be near the bottom of the league in either of those columns.
So, short answer: They're not hitting the ball hard enough, and when they do, it's getting caught too often.
Al Zarilla said:Sox are also next to last in AL team strikeouts. Houston is first with 458, Sox have 321 and KC 267. There goes that theory (getting behind and striking out too much). So WTF is wrong? 64 kabillion dollar question.
ivanvamp said:
Team K rate, LD rate, and total runs scored:
2015: 16.7% K, 25% LD, 3.8 R/G
2014: 21.5% K, 24% LD, 3.9 R/G
2013: 20.5% K, 23% LD, 5.3 R/G
2012: 19.4% K, 18% LD, 4.5 R/G
2011: 17.3% K, 18% LD, 5.4 R/G
2010: 17.9% K, 19% LD, 5.0 R/G
2009: 17.7% K, 18% LD, 5.4 R/G
2008: 16.7% K, 19% LD, 5.2 R/G
2007: 16.2% K, 19% LD, 5.4 R/G
2006: 16.4% K, 19% LD, 5.1 R/G
2005: 16.3% K, 18% LD, 5.6 R/G
2004: 18.3% K, 18% LD, 5.9 R/G
2003: 14.4% K, 17% LD, 5.9 R/G
The 2015 Red Sox have their lowest team K rate since 2008, and their highest LD rate in at least 13 years. But the lowest number of runs scored in at least 13 years too.
So…..WTF is going on? If Eric Van was here he'd attribute it all to just plain bad luck. But last year they had a 24% LD rate and just one-tenth of a run more scored per game. How can this team hit such a high percentage of line drives (I assume this means they're generally hitting the ball harder) but come up with such a piddly small amount of runs?
DanoooME said:
Then no one should ever put you in charge of a hot dog stand, let alone a baseball team. Eventually you'll end up payingmillionshundreds of thousands of dollars per year for guys no longer working in the organization and the philosophy will change so often the players will get more confused and continue on a downward spiral.
Savin Hillbilly said:So, short answer: They're not hitting the ball hard enough, and when they do, it's getting caught too often.
Not to mention they are a slow ass station to station team on the bases aside from Mookie and Castillo. Team speed definitely hurts the slugging percentage.KenTremendous said:
Eleven hits and two walks today, and they scored three runs. Because the eleven hits were all singles.
They're second to last in the AL in SLG. Until that changes, nothing else will.
Pedroia, Bogaerts, and Swihart may not be speedsters, but they're not slow ass station to station players.grimshaw said:Not to mention they are a slow ass station to station team on the bases aside from Mookie and Castillo. Team speed definitely hurts the slugging percentage.
grimshaw said:Not to mention they are a slow ass station to station team on the bases aside from Mookie and Castillo. Team speed definitely hurts the slugging percentage.
KenTremendous said:Fenway has traditionally been one of the best doubles parks in baseball. The Red Sox leader in doubles is Betts with 10, which ties him for 81st in MLB.
Speed isn't the problem. It's power.
Probably want to exclude Swihart from that list. He has wheels.Bob Montgomery's Helmet Hat said:Pedroia, Bogaerts, and Swihart may not be speedsters, but they're not slow ass station to station players.
I was looking for a post somewhat like this regarding an organizational shift in plate approach, and think, if anything they are transitioning away from it. When BC was running the farm and Theo was GMing, they wanted every prospect walking at a 10% walk rate or higher. They wanted everyone grinding like it was 2003, with no breaks in the lineup.jimv said:Apologies if these points have been brought up earlier. The offense seems to be playing a PED-era style -
The roster seems to be built around aging power hitters and youngsters trying to learn their way in the bigs. And what two groups seem most depressed in the post PED-era?
- work deep into counts and get the starter out early. Starters are more aggressive now and the batters are constantly in two strike counts. Sometimes the best pitch to hit comes early in the at bat
- get into the soft underside of the bullpen. Nowadays it seems every bullpen will roll out multiple guys throwing mid 90s. There aren't as many runs in the late innings any more
- advancing base to base and waiting for someone to hit a homer. The home runs aren't happening, find some other ways to get runs across the plate, there are some athletic guys on the team, take the extra base when available
- Every veteran trying to hit the ball 450 feet each PA. A double to the opposite field is a good thing guys. A sac fly is a positive when 4 or 5 runs will win the game. Please stop trying to pull everything
ivanvamp said:
Team K rate, LD rate, and total runs scored:
2015: 16.7% K, 25% LD, 3.8 R/G
2014: 21.5% K, 24% LD, 3.9 R/G
2013: 20.5% K, 23% LD, 5.3 R/G
2012: 19.4% K, 18% LD, 4.5 R/G
2011: 17.3% K, 18% LD, 5.4 R/G
2010: 17.9% K, 19% LD, 5.0 R/G
2009: 17.7% K, 18% LD, 5.4 R/G
2008: 16.7% K, 19% LD, 5.2 R/G
2007: 16.2% K, 19% LD, 5.4 R/G
2006: 16.4% K, 19% LD, 5.1 R/G
2005: 16.3% K, 18% LD, 5.6 R/G
2004: 18.3% K, 18% LD, 5.9 R/G
2003: 14.4% K, 17% LD, 5.9 R/G
The 2015 Red Sox have their lowest team K rate since 2008, and their highest LD rate in at least 13 years. But the lowest number of runs scored in at least 13 years too.
So…..WTF is going on? If Eric Van was here he'd attribute it all to just plain bad luck. But last year they had a 24% LD rate and just one-tenth of a run more scored per game. How can this team hit such a high percentage of line drives (I assume this means they're generally hitting the ball harder) but come up with such a piddly small amount of runs?
Al Zarilla said:Sox are also next to last in AL team strikeouts. Houston is first with 458, Sox have 321 and KC 267. There goes that theory (getting behind and striking out too much). So WTF is wrong? 64 kabillion dollar question.
Savin Hillbilly said:
So, short answer: They're not hitting the ball hard enough, and when they do, it's getting caught too often.
Al Zarilla said:The latter should even out over time, the former. who knows.
Presumably from BBref or Baseball Savant, whose batted-ball numbers are similar, and quite different from FG's. Good article about this here. Based on that article, I would say that regardless of which set of numbers is more reliable in any given year, FG's are better for multiyear trend-watching, because the BBref LD rates took a large leap a couple of years ago--which strongly suggests that the criteria for a LD changed at that point--while FG's rates remained fairly steady.Fishy1 said:Where are you getting your numbers, ivanvamp?
Fishy1 said:
Where are you getting your numbers, ivanvamp? fangraphs has the Sox in a race for the bottom of the barrel (or the bottle, for that matter) with a LD% of 19.7, 3% lower than their 3rd best mark of 22.7% in 2013. They're leading the league in 'soft-as-hell' contact, as well, at 21% (which is 8% worst than their mark in 2013, where they had the least soft contact) -- the combination of which is giving them their terminally low BABIP of .269. In fact, no one has a LD% that high, according to fangraphs.
There's a couple ways of thinking about luck here. The first one, which would appear to be incorrect, is that "the balls aren't finding the holes." By all accounts, they shouldn't be. The Sox are hitting like shit.
The other way of thinking about luck would be to say that the Red Sox are all slumping at the same time. That would appear to be a bad piece of luck assuming a number of things: that Ortiz isn't toast, that Betts will find a way to start driving the ball now that pitchers aren't feeding him fastballs inside, that Xander will turn the corner, that Castillo will start to hit, that Napoli will continue to heat up, that Swihart will hit a home run this year, etc.
I've been thinking for a while that this team is going to be just as fearsome as it has been pathetic once everyone heats up at the same time. My optimism has begun to wane. But I can't predict the future, so I'm holding out hope. There's an enormous amount of talent on this team, and if everyone gets hot at once, it could start looking really bad for the AL East.
Thanks for this. It appears this would explain the jump in LD% ivanvamp had noticed. By bref, everybody is hitting way more line drives now than they were before. And from looking at the article, if I had to guess, it sounds to me like bref reclassified "fliners" to line drives, rather than fly balls. But that's just idle speculation, and probably not useful. It's frustrating that there's a lack of transparency there.Savin Hillbilly said:Presumably from BBref or Baseball Savant, whose batted-ball numbers are similar, and quite different from FG's. Good article about this here. Based on that article, I would say that regardless of which set of numbers is more reliable in any given year, FG's are better for multiyear trend-watching, because the BBref LD rates took a large leap a couple of years ago--which strongly suggests that the criteria for a LD changed at that point--while FG's rates remained fairly steady.
koufax37 said:I'm pretty sure the hitting coach should always be fired. He is the fifth guy in the horror film who says "I'm just going to run back to the shed to make sure everything is locked up", and as such he should know his role.
Sorry Chili, but that is how it works. You aren't really responsible and in 80% of the cases the hitting coach's impact is completely negligible (with maybe 10% minor positive, 10% minor negative...there aren't any Leo Mazzone's on this side of the ball).
Also Napoli is generally regarded as an excellent baserunner, if not a speedster by any means. Not that he's ever on, but hey, you can't accuse him of clogging the bases.gryoung said:Probably want to exclude Swihart from that list. He has wheels.
glennhoffmania said:
Normally I'd agree with you but when we read stories about Pedroia coming in early to look at tape of Hanley and finding a flaw in his swing I don't know how Chili doesn't get crucified. And the fact that his boss is aware of this happening twice now makes me wonder what the boss is thinking.
glennhoffmania said:
Normally I'd agree with you but when we read stories about Pedroia coming in early to look at tape of Hanley and finding a flaw in his swing I don't know how Chili doesn't get crucified. And the fact that his boss is aware of this happening twice now makes me wonder what the boss is thinking.
I've been accused of always bringing up the Giants, but, here goes anyway. Since they've been winning in 2010, everybody knows it's been mostly because of pitching and defense. They've had long stretches where their fans were screaming for hitting coach Bam Bam Meulens head on a stick, year after year, their offense has been so weak. This year, out of nowhere, they have the best team BA and OPS in the NL. Giants are having career years all over the place, and that doesn't even include Buster Posey or Hunter Pence. So, what happened? You could see Brandon Belt or Brandon Crawford having a career year because they're still young and have been progressing year by year. But, Nori Aoki at 33? Even perennial fourth outfielder type Gregor Blanco is hitting very well. Did Bam Bam have anything to do with the Giants leap in hitting this year? I doubt it. Nobody knows, or is saying anything. A bunch of them could cool off all at once, sure. Bottom line is that if the Giants can hit like they have been all of a sudden for the first third of this year, I suppose the Red Sox offense could turn it on too. Like KG said, anything is possible. Hope springs eternal.koufax37 said:
Yes, I'm willing to consider the possibility that Chili is in the 10% where he is actually responsible for a negative impact and *should* be fired instead of the 80% where he is irrelevant and *might as well* be fired. I think we both agree we can rule out the 10% where he could be a minor positive and *should not* be fired.
I'd love to see Ortiz and Sandoval each sitting against 50% of LHP, with Hanley sliding into their positions. This should keep them happy, as I'm sure neither Sandoval nor Ortiz would take well to sitting against all LHP. At this stage of their careers, they are both pretty close to equally inept vs. LHP, with Ortiz probably the better hitter, but Sandoval adding some value back with his fielding. The problem is, with any idea of sitting Ortiz/Sandoval against LHP, you need a LF that will outperform them, which would have to be a RHB in most cases. Victorino is a perfect fit. So is a producing Allen Craig. In fact, if you have both, you can put together an absolutely loaded lineup against LHP:Doctor G said:If you platoon Hanley and Ortiz at DH, you have a 900plus OPS designated hitter to bat cleanup