1275 replies to this topic

[aron7awol]

Of course you know in real life that the optimal lineup on paper might score fewer runs than the least optimal.

Otto, I'm very surprised to see someone as mathematically proficient as you are attempting to make that point. I know you are aware that in the long run, optimal lineups will score more runs than less that optimal lineups.

The other point is that the truly optimal lineup is one that has never been used by any manager ever.

This is a reason not to optimize your lineup? Thinking outside the box and challenging assumptions is what drives innovation. Last time I checked, what the other 31 managers do with their lineups has no effect on the Red Sox' run production. Taking advantage of market inefficiencies gives you just that, an advantage over your competition, and it could very easily be the difference in making the playoffs or winning the division and not.

Anyway, even putting that aside, no manager will, or can, put together an "optimal" lineup every day. And even if he did, to actually produce the additional wins that you talk about, the players in the optimal lineup must perform optimally every time out.They can't have slumps. They can't get hurt. The have to perform in a consistent, predictable fashion. Which obviously does not happen in real life.

This is absolutely not true. Can you predict exactly what a player's performance will be on a particular night? No, of course not, but you can clearly come up with expected production for each player and optimize the lineup according to that. Come on, this stuff should be obvious.

The point isn't that a manager should not try to optimze his lineup. The point is, of all the tactical decsions in a game, the bating order is probably the least important. Who is in the batting order is much more important than where each player in the order hits in that order. So Jimy Williams getting Darren Lewis 300 ABs at the expense of Troy O'Leary and (yes) Carl Everett was a far worse decision that letting Lewis and his .300 OBA get those ABs from the leadoff spot - bad as that decison was.

This is completely irrelevant as far as lineup optimization. Let's say that, in order of importance, you have the following things you can do to score more runs:

1. Acquire good players
2. Actually put these good players into your lineup
3. Optimize the lineup, whoever is in it

Clearly, if you don't acquire good players, you will score less runs. Even if you do acquire good players, but don't put them in your lineup and play lesser players instead, you will score less runs. And regardless of whether you do 1 and/or 2, optimizing the lineup that is actually playing in the games will still score more runs. Yes, it is the least important of the 3, but that doesn't change the fact that it can increase run scoring.

[Carl Everetts Therapist]

Any line-up constructed with this bunch of players would have lost the game... Buchholz giving up 5 homers is the reason why the Sox lost yesterday. The only decision that Bobby V could have made to change that would have been to start a different pitcher and that isn't happening (not at this point anyway).

That being said, there is no reason that Jason Repko should be in the line-up unless there is another injury. If CF is such a problem with Cody Ross or Darnell Macdonald manning it then it's time to make a trade. Repko looks overmatched in just about every way and I have a feeling his offensive upside is a swinging bunt or a bloop that falls in just behind the infielders.... yes he made a nice catch, but he is a complete blackhole with the bat.

At some point something needs to be done to shake things up, whether it's calling up Lavarnway to give Salty a break or making a trade, something needs to alleviate some of the automatic outs in the line-up. It feels as though the Sox are a National League team having the pitcher bat, facing American League offensive Juggernauts.

It's time to look for some options that can break the stagnant state of the team... Bobby V can only shuffle the batting order so many times, it desperately needs an infusion at least until Crawford or Ellsbury return.

Edited by Carl Everetts Therapist, 21 April 2012 - 07:27 AM.

[Rudy Pemberton]

I'd love to find a way to get Lavarnway and Middlebrooks up, but it seems to early to decide Youks is done and that Salty isn't going to cut it. The real problem is the OF, where upgrades on Repko and McDonald should be easy to find, but don't seem to be. Giving Linares a shot seems like the best idea. I don't really see what Spears brings to the table; it's a real problem when he's PH. Just attempt to invigorate the team with some youth and energy and see what happens. Re-evaluate in a few weeks.

[OttoC]

Otto, I'm very surprised to see someone as mathematically proficient as you are attempting to make that point. I know you are aware that in the long run, optimal lineups will score more runs than less that optimal lineups.
...

I know very well that in the long run there may be a difference; however, I am not certain that 162 games constitutes a long run, much less one game out of thirteen.

There, I just flipped a coin 162 times and it came up 87 heads, 75 tails. Do I conclude that the coin is unfair?

[Eddie Jurak]

If Bobby's issues were limited to lineups, there would be nothing to see here.

What bothers me is his poor pitching staff management. He came in with a reputation of "brilliiant in-game manager who never gets outmanaged by anyone, ever!". But the reality has been more that he routinely gets outmanaged by himself.

Yes, the pitching staff has major, major issues. But that should represent an opportunity for a brilliant manager to get more out of the staff than a poor one. Go back and look at the pitching staffs Jimy Williams worked with in 1998 and 1999. So far what has Bobby done with the pitching staff that Grady Little wouldn't have done? He doesn't use guys in non-traditional roles, he doesn't play matchups, and he'll actually go to bad matchups frequently. There's a limit to how well any manager would do given the roster he has to work with, but there is little evidence to suggest that Valentine is anywhere near that level.

[Buzzkill Pauley]

I'd love to find a way to get Lavarnway and Middlebrooks up, but it seems to early to decide Youks is done and that Salty isn't going to cut it. The real problem is the OF, where upgrades on Repko and McDonald should be easy to find, but don't seem to be. Giving Linares a shot seems like the best idea. I don't really see what Spears brings to the table; it's a real problem when he's PH. Just attempt to invigorate the team with some youth and energy and see what happens. Re-evaluate in a few weeks.

Linares went down in the 1st inning yesterday with an apparent leg injury, so he's likely not the best option. I still say calling up Lin would be the best solution to CF, if matched with a swap of Salty and Lavarnway.

There's pretty much no way Lavarnway-Lin doesn't give at least equivalent production to Repko and Salty's combined .100/.143/.200 line. And with better defense, as well.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Well, I'd expect Repko to hit better than Repko has, if he's kept around. I don't see any rational reason to think Lin would outhit Repko. A 229 / 319 / 293 AAA line isn't very inspiring. They should be able to find a better hitter than Repko, Lin, or McDonald? Isn't this type of freely available talent supposed to be wandering the streets just looking for a chance? Where's the Brian Daubach of OFers?

[tims4wins]

I think this is a case of people talking past each other. The issue is pretty simple IMO. To date, Bobby has made some sub-optimal decisions in lineup construction, offensive strategy (e.g., bunting, stealing), and bullpen usage. And while those decisions may have cost the team a run here or a run there, they haven't really mattered because the team is losing games by bunches, and it's hard to argue that his decisions have conclusively cost them runs - other relievers may have also shit the bed, and on the offensive side of things, for instance they may have lost 10-9 in the 2nd game of the year if he didn't call for the bunt and they didn't tack on the insurance run in the top of the 9th.

However, going forward, we should expect sub-optimal decisions to cost the team runs and eventually losses - just because they haven't to date doesn't mean they won't over the course of 162 games.

So to summarize, while Bobby has been very low on the list of reasons for the 4-9 start, it doesn't mean that he gets a pass, and it doesn't mean that his management of this team won't cost the team going forward.

[Plympton91]

It's amazing to me that Linares is hurt again, this team is cursed by injuries at this point. Still, I am quite shocked that the Red Sox management as a group feels best options to replace an injured Ellsbury is Jason Repko, instead of using Sweeney and Ross in CF and getting a replacement level corner outfield bat from somewhere.

Following up on Jurak's post above and thinking back to Jimy Williams, I remember being on SOSH in 2001, and being one of the people pulling my hair out about Williams all of sudden mismanaging the pitching staff, not playing matchups, burying people who had great Major League Equivalent batting stats and going with Mike Benjamin's and Dlew's of the world. At the same time, there was a frusterating contingent of older fans posting, "The talent just isn't there, the manager doesn't matter at this point" Yes, Yes, I shouted back, the manager can still optimize results from inferior talent! Now, I'm one of the older guys, the manager can't optimize inferior talent enough to matter. Williams couldn't do it in 2001 with Pedro and Nomar down; Tito couldn't do it when injuries struck in 2006 and 2010 and 2011; Valentine can't do it in 2012. The pitchers that people want Valentine to optimize are the same pitchers that evoked screams of horror everytime Tito went to them instead of Bard or Papelbon last September. Go look it up.

There's no reason to expect that this team as currently constructed is any better than the team that took the field for the final two weeks of 2011. Absent Ellsbury and Papelbon, it might, in fact, be even worse.

They've got to have someone step up and put them on their back. Time for Gonzalez to have a month with a 1150 OPS, or for Lester and Beckett to throw back-to-back shutouts, or for once in my goddamm life, have some no name journeyman scrub pitcher step up and go 10-1 for the Red Sox instead of for the Yankees.

[Gene Conleys Plane Ticket]

I think this is a case of people talking past each other. The issue is pretty simple IMO. To date, Bobby has made some sub-optimal decisions in lineup construction, offensive strategy (e.g., bunting, stealing), and bullpen usage. And while those decisions may have cost the team a run here or a run there, they haven't really mattered because the team is losing games by bunches, and it's hard to argue that his decisions have conclusively cost them runs - other relievers may have also shit the bed, and on the offensive side of things, for instance they may have lost 10-9 in the 2nd game of the year if he didn't call for the bunt and they didn't tack on the insurance run in the top of the 9th.

I think this is exactly right. Thanks for seeing and explaining the point!

However, going forward, we should expect sub-optimal decisions to cost the team runs and eventually losses - just because they haven't to date doesn't mean they won't over the course of 162 games.

This is where I have an issue with the "Blaming Bobby" outlook to this point. Why shoud we expect "sub-optimal" decisions "going forward" after only 13 games? We have an extremely small sample size, only 8% of the season completed. Even Grady Little got about 25% of the way in to his first season as I recall before it was clear how bad he was -- and many people gave him the whole 2002 season. But due to the preexisting bias against Valentine (I can think of no other reason) we're throwing the very idea of SSS out the window and assuming the types of allegedly poor decisions he's made over the first 0.08 of the season will continue over the remaining 0.92.

Not only that, but we are ignoring his entire past history. I understand most of us, myself included, don't have the time or energy to go back over his previous 15 MLB managerial seasons and analyze his decision-making trends. Maybe someone here has that spreadsheet and can do the research. But I do know that he took a 90-loss Mets team and, from '96 to '97 added 17 wins right away. And within three years had the team well over 90 wins and in the playoffs.

That track record counts. I'd say it counts a lot more than 13 games in April with a injury-plagued, talent-deficient Red Sox team.

Finally, we're failing to see our own confirmation bias in analyzing BV's decision making. We're focusing solely on the bad decisions -- and many of those are debatable as to how bad they actually were. Has he made any good decisions so far? Has he done anything to put the players in a position to win rather than lose? I'm quite sure that he has, but the problem here is, no one's looking for those. We're only looking for the bad ones. But wouldn't it be just as valid to say, "going forward, we should expect optimal decisions to gain the team runs and eventually wins"?

So to summarize, while Bobby has been very low on the list of reasons for the 4-9 start, it doesn't mean that he gets a pass, and it doesn't mean that his management of this team won't cost the team going forward.

So to summarize, while Bobby has been very low on the list of reasons for the 4-9 start, it doesn't mean that he gets unfairly condemned based on small sample size , and it doesn't mean that his management of this team won't help the team going forward.

I honestly have no idea or even expectations about what will happen vis-a-vis Bobby V going forward, but I do know the one statement is just as valid as the other.

[tims4wins]

Why shoud we expect "sub-optimal" decisions "going forward" after only 13 games?

Sorry, I should have been more clear here. I wasn't saying we should expect sub-optimal decisions to continue - I was saying that we should expect that sub-optimal decisions, IF THEY ARE MADE, will eventually cost the team runs and wins.

So to summarize, while Bobby has been very low on the list of reasons for the 4-9 start, it doesn't mean that he gets unfairly condemned based on small sample size , and it doesn't mean that his management of this team won't help the team going forward.

I honestly have no idea or even expectations about what will happen vis-a-vis Bobby V going forward, but I do know the one statement is just as valid as the other.

I 100% agree with this.

[tims4wins]

For all the talk about how Bobby should have used Albers in X situation or should have used Padilla in Y situation... I think today proves that we can't blame much, if any, of the pitching problems on him. The pitching on this team simply sucks.

[TheGoldenGreek33]

For all the talk about how Bobby should have used Albers in X situation or should have used Padilla in Y situation... I think today proves that we can't blame much, if any, of the pitching problems on him. The pitching on this team simply sucks.

Best post of the thread.

[jsinger121]

For all the talk about how Bobby should have used Albers in X situation or should have used Padilla in Y situation... I think today proves that we can't blame much, if any, of the pitching problems on him. The pitching on this team simply sucks.

Agreed....The bullpen sucks. Most of the starting pitching sucks. It isn't his fault if he was given garbage to work with.

[Sprowl]

Agreed....The bullpen sucks. Most of the starting pitching sucks. It isn't his fault if he was given garbage to work with.

Aside from Buchholz, the starters have been pretty good, considering the opposition. Beckett and Lester each threw one lemon and two solid games.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Using Padilla in a low leverage spot, again. Oh, wait.

[amh03]

They have to fire that man!

Seriously - his reaction looked like a disappointed, non-involved attendee's reaction. Like the people he came to the game are big fans and just to pay them respect for bringing him he shows a little disappointment! AGH!!!

Edited by amh03, 21 April 2012 - 06:21 PM.

[Red(s)HawksFan]

They have to fire that man!

If you mean Aceves, hell yes.

Much as I want to blame this on Valentine, this one isn't on him.

[jose melendez]

I have been thinkng about this a lot.

I do not like Boby V. I never liked Bobby V. But this is not his fault. How one manages pitchers is not an issue when there is litereally no one in the bullpen you can trust to hold a nine run lead.

[DukeSox]

They have to fire that man!

Seriously - his reaction looked like a disappointed, non-involved attendee's reaction. Like the people he came to the game are big fans and just to pay them respect for bringing him he shows a little disappointment! AGH!!!

I was just going to comment on this.

Someone that shows that much emotion on his face, when he knows the cameras will be on the dugout, is putting on a show. He's making it about him. Just give the Francona blank stare. But no, Bobby V is a small child who thinks about himself first.

There is no question he is a dufus.

[Quintanariffic]

No mention of the little "fuck you" tip of the cap on the way back from yanking Thomas?

[mt8thsw9th]

For all the talk about how Bobby should have used Albers in X situation or should have used Padilla in Y situation... I think today proves that we can't blame much, if any, of the pitching problems on him. The pitching on this team simply sucks.

Logic has no place in this thread. Please free up space for more posts where people repeatedly mouth-breathe through their keyboards. Can a dope split posts like t4w's out?

[86spike]

So now Valentine needs to show no emotion.

You haters are out of touch with all objectivity.

Edited by 86spike, 21 April 2012 - 06:49 PM.

[amh03]

So now Valentine needs to show no emotion.

You haters are out of touch with all objectivity.

I'm not a hater...I feel badly for Valentine. Of course, the owners are responsible for the players that are in that dugout. They brought Valentine into a situation he was enormously unprepared to deal with...and, imho, he's just not showing managerial leadership. Watch the film - he followed that ground rule double into the stands and the look on his face read "bummer"...he needs to drop the snarky tips of the cap to the crowd, plaster a look of determination and confidence on his face, and deal with the situation that he's in. And, to be honest, I'm not even sure he can fix much. The whole Youk situation this week is completely illustrative of his grasp of this situation, or lack thereof. He casually says something...someone takes him to task and he backs right up and tries to turn around. Weak.

Look - he's a very nice man. Does some great charity work. Is an awesome dancer, from what I hear. Very entertaining story teller, I'm sure. But...he's wrong for this job at this time.

And the ownership needs to deal with this.

Edited by amh03, 21 April 2012 - 06:58 PM.

[Super Nomario]

The hatred Bobby V is provoking is starting to make me think he's a smart hire. Every ounce of vitriol directed his way is a distraction from how flawed the roster is and how many players have failed to live up to expectations.

[Tony C]

For all the talk about how Bobby should have used Albers in X situation or should have used Padilla in Y situation... I think today proves that we can't blame much, if any, of the pitching problems on him. The pitching on this team simply sucks.

Yep. I'm not sure how anyone can deny this -- they can only change the topic to irrelevant issues. Problem is, this is the topic -- the talent isn't there.

So now Valentine needs to show no emotion.

You haters are out of touch with all objectivity.

Yep again. In re today's game, the last thing I care about -- that anyone should care about -- is if BV had the proper grimace to stare ratio or whatever.

[86spike]

I'm not a hater...I feel badly for Valentine. Of course, the owners are responsible for the players that are in that dugout. They brought Valentine into a situation he was enormously unprepared to deal with...and, imho, he's just not showing managerial leadership. Watch the film - he followed that ground rule double into the stands and the look on his face read "bummer"...he needs to drop the snarky tips of the cap to the crowd, plaster a look of determination and confidence on his face, and deal with the situation that he's in. And, to be honest, I'm not even sure he can fix much. The whole Youk situation this week is completely illustrative of his grasp of this situation, or lack thereof. He casually says something...someone takes him to task and he backs right up and tries to turn around. Weak.

Look - he's a very nice man. Does some great charity work. Is an awesome dancer, from what I hear. Very entertaining story teller, I'm sure. But...he's wrong for this job at this time.

And the ownership needs to deal with this.

You really seriously think he should be fired because he showed emotion as his team imploded, yet again? Seriously?

That's ridiculous.

[Jinhocho]

Yep. I'm not sure how anyone can deny this -- they can only change the topic to irrelevant issues. Problem is, this is the topic -- the talent isn't there.




Yep again. In re today's game, the last thing I care about -- that anyone should care about -- is if BV had the proper grimace to stare ratio or whatever.

Hopefully, for all its not his fault, he will be gone at the end of the year and LL will follow him.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

While no manager can win if he's given shitty players, he's not a helpless bystander either. Aceves was awesome last year and this year he sucks after his role was changed; why? The pen was mediocre last year, this year it's the worst we've ever seen. Why?

Valentine's job is to turn this disaster around. So far it's only gotten worse. He has to find a solution and he has to do it soon.

He'll have to move Bard back to the pen now, I would think.

[TheYellowDart5]

While no manager can win if he's given shitty players, he's not a helpless bystander either. Aceves was awesome last year and this year he sucks after his role was changed; why? The pen was mediocre last year, this year it's the worst we've ever seen. Why?

Uh ... because the two best relievers from last year aren't in the bullpen any more?

Think about it: The major players in this year's bullpen (or at least, the ones on the team right now) were all there in September of last year when they all sucked. And the new additions weren't high-priced free agents or big trade pickups; they're guys like Tazawa and Thomas and Padilla who are total retreads. Nothing was done to make this bullpen better; in fact, the new FO just made it worse, or at least didn't do anything to improve it (considering Papelbon to Bailey being a lateral move).

[86spike]

Hopefully, for all its not his fault, he will be gone at the end of the year and LL will follow him.

You think Henry is going to run Lucchino out of town?

[Pumpsie]

The pen was mediocre last year, this year it's the worst we've ever seen. Why?

Because Bard and Papelbon are no longer in it.

DUH!

He'll have to move Bard back to the pen now, I would think.

And he was right about THAT all along now, wasn't he?

[rembrat]

Bard would be closing and only allowed to pitch in the 9th. How would that help the pen? Padilla and Albers blew it in the 7th!

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Pumpsie, they could have SHOT Bard and Paps and the bullpen shouldn't be this bad. Aceves went from awesome last year to awful in this, so your point doesn't explain the whole collapse.

My point about Bard is that it's Valentine's job to fix the pen and he'll have to move Bard back to do so. Ball's in his court.

[czar]

I despise Bobby V. but I agree with those who are saying "what do you want him to do?" This loss was squarely on a bullpen that couldn't retire anyone. It's not like he hung with Albers until the Yankees took the lead and Aceves started mowing guys down.

(Given my #BobbyBall feelings, though, I can only hope that ownership isn't this rational)

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Bard would be closing and only allowed to pitch in the 9th. How would that help the pen? Padilla and Albers blew it in the 7th!

This. Absolutely this. Bard in the rotation is a long range, long term thing. Moving him to the pen now is short-sighted and putting a bandaid on a shotgun blast to the belly.

[Laser Show]

Bard would be closing and only allowed to pitch in the 9th. How would that help the pen? Padilla and Albers blew it in the 7th!

Yea. Moving Bard back fixes nothing at this point.

[Pumpsie]

Pumpsie, they could have SHOT Bard and Paps and the bullpen shouldn't be this bad. Aceves went from awesome last year to awful in this, so your point doesn't explain the whole collapse.

My point about Bard is that it's Valentine's job to fix the pen and he'll have to move Bard back to do so. Ball's in his court.

You really have no point here because replacing crap with crap isn't going to help much. He isn't the GM. Direct you criticism to Ben Cherington who who put this monstrosity together.

[86spike]

Yea. Moving Bard back fixes nothing at this point.

Unless he struggles starting. IMO, if he can't cut his BBs over the next few starts, he might be better off in the pen anyway.

[E5 Yaz]

alexspeier: BV said that this is 'a psychological situation.' Referenced September collapse, Ellsbury. 'We've got to be tough'

[86spike]

He's right. They're shell shocked.

Edited by 86spike, 21 April 2012 - 07:34 PM.

[E5 Yaz]

cafardo: John Henry and Ben Cherington in Bobby Valentine's office after game.

[rembrat]

He's right. They're she'll shocked.

Maybe he should call some of these guys out.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

A manager can't just throw up his hands, Pumps. He needs to find a solution that works somehow. You imply that he has no recourse and I disagree with that. The status quo is unacceptable. It's his fucking job to figure this mess out.

Frankly it doesnt really matter; he'll be fired by May 15 if this shit doesn't get better, fair or not. Managers are much easier to dump than players and right now the results are hideous.

[Laser Show]

@nickcafardo: John Henry and Ben Cherington in Bobby Valentine's office after game.

Link

[E5 Yaz]

Maybe he should call some of these guys out.

Because that worked so well with Youk?

[soxfan121]

No mention of the little "fuck you" tip of the cap on the way back from yanking Thomas?

I loved it. People should be booing the players, Ben Cherington and Bobby Valentine - in that order. Bobby being pissy about the booing was better than pretending that all is well and that people were "battling out there."

The hatred Bobby V is provoking is starting to make me think he's a smart hire. Every ounce of vitriol directed his way is a distraction from how flawed the roster is and how many players have failed to live up to expectations.

This, one hundred million times THIS.

[JakeRae]

I'm gonna take one more stab at this...

This is a thread for discussing Bobby Valentine and his performance. The quality of the team he has been given is not terribly relevant toward a discussion of his performance.

Those of us who are criticizing Bobby V are not claiming that this team would be off to a 10-4 start without him. But, we feel it is relevant to discuss the positive and negative moves of the manager. I would love to see this thread fleshed out with people who think Bobby V is a good manager pointing out things that he has done or is doing well. It would make this a far more interesting discussion. Responding to criticisms of Bobby V's decision making with, "Well, the team sucks anyway..." is not constructive. It does not add to the discussion. The team might suck anyways but that isn't what this thread is about and it isn't germane to a discussion of Bobby V being the worst manager ever, the best manager ever, or something in between.

So, please, if you want to defend Bobby V's performance, defend his performance. That would be great. Trashing the roster construction does not constitute defending the performance of Bobby Valentine.

[Seven Costanza]

I don't have anything to add other than I agree with Soxfan's post 1000 percent.

Edited by Seven Costanza, 21 April 2012 - 07:38 PM.

[86spike]

A manager can't just throw up his hands, Pumps. He needs to find a solution that works somehow. You imply that he has no recourse and I disagree with that. The status quo is unacceptable. It's his fucking job to figure this mess out.

Frankly it doesnt really matter; he'll be fired by May 15 if this shit doesn't get better, fair or not. Managers are much easier to dump than players and right now the results are hideous.

Is it Bogar Time?