Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

Photo

Assuming Gammo is Right, Weigh In


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
47 replies to this topic

Poll: Assuming Gammo is Right, Weigh In (228 member(s) have cast votes)

Who do you think the Sox will select?

  1. Farrell (199 votes [87.67%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 87.67%

  2. Ausmus (28 votes [12.33%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 12.33%

Who do you want the Sox to select?

  1. Farrell (55 votes [24.23%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 24.23%

  2. Ausmus (172 votes [75.77%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 75.77%

Is the answer to the first two questions the same?

  1. Yes (81 votes [35.68%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 35.68%

  2. No (146 votes [64.32%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 64.32%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 TheoShmeo


  • made johnny damon think long and hard


  • 8175 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 02:46 PM

Gammo said on Chris Russo's show on Sirius today that it's down to Farrell and Ausmus.

Let's assume that's right.

In other words, let's eliminate the other three candidates from discussion in this particular thread and not spend time debating whether Gammo got it right.

Which one will the Sox pick?

Which one should the Sox pick?

And did you answer yes to the first two questions?

#2 jsinger121


  • @jsinger121


  • 10021 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 02:47 PM

Think Farrell
Want Ausmus

#3 ThatsMyPeskyPole

  • 452 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 02:50 PM

So far just me voting Farrell and Farrell- experience at this time might better served, only with little or no comp.

#4 gammoseditor


  • also had a stroke


  • 2738 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 02:53 PM

I wonder if the sox are selling this line of thinking in case Toronto wants to much? That way if they go with Ausmus they can claim he's the guy they wanted anyway.

#5 rembrat


  • SoSH Member


  • 23112 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 02:54 PM

Farrell across the board. The pitchers need someone they can trust.

#6 Clears Cleaver


  • SoSH Member


  • 8285 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 02:59 PM

i wonder if they can hire Farrell and also have Ausmus on staff, maybe as bench coach. that would be a Sox thing to do

#7 E5 Yaz


  • Transcends message boarding


  • 25126 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 02:59 PM

Farrell across the board. The pitchers need someone they can trust.


And Ausmus was considered one of the best handlers of pitchers among catchers

#8 Titoschew

  • 2867 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 03:03 PM

I voted they're picking Farrell but I want Ausmus. There may be no tangible value in starting fresh with a new face, but it feels like the right tact to be taking.

#9 rembrat


  • SoSH Member


  • 23112 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 03:04 PM

And Ausmus was considered one of the best handlers of pitchers among catchers


Sure, but was he? Tek has that reputation and we all know its just Fastball Junction all day. How do we separate fact from baseball media hyperbole?

#10 SoxScout


  • Maalox Territory


  • 30161 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 03:05 PM

I want Farrell if all things are equal. If the Jays try to hold it up, or they are asking for "a lot", I would move to Ausmus so fast and be just as happy.

#11 E5 Yaz


  • Transcends message boarding


  • 25126 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 03:07 PM

Sure, but was he? Tek has that reputation and we all know its just Fastball Junction all day. How do we separate fact from baseball media hyperbole?


As with most things, we have to go with what players say and not what fans think they know

#12 I am an Idiot


  • "Duke"


  • 3452 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 03:09 PM

I voted Farrell, Ausmus.

I think they'll go with Farrell, because that seems to be the way public perception wanted it to go all season. I want them to go with Ausmus, because I really don't see the point in losing a prospect, no matter how minor, for a manager.

#13 Manramsclan

  • 1975 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 03:13 PM

Sure, but was he? Tek has that reputation and we all know its just Fastball Junction all day. How do we separate fact from baseball media hyperbole?


Anecdotally speaking, has any player that has played with him come out with such forceful support for Tek as manager as they have for Brad Ausmus?

Pettitte
Lidge

It seems to me that the idea that Tek would be a great manager has come more from the media, the front office, and our own perception of Tek than from any other players. I don't recall any ringing endorsements for Tek that rival these two from Lidge and Pettitte. In fact, I recall a few players questioning his leadership.

Edit: Failing the intternett

Edited by Manramsclan, 19 October 2012 - 03:15 PM.


#14 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28120 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 03:16 PM

Oops, misread that.

Edited by Rudy Pemberton, 19 October 2012 - 03:53 PM.


#15 AlNipper49


  • Huge Member


  • 33795 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 03:27 PM

Nick Cafardo wants Ausmus, so by definition that makes me a Farrell guy

#16 SoxLegacy

  • 544 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 03:29 PM

I selected Ausmus and Ausmus. I think the Sox might want Farrell, but if the situation with Toronto gets sticky, I can see them quickly walking away to door number 2. While I would not be unhappy with Farrell, think a fresh set of eyes from outside the organization would be helpful. Just because an organization does something a certain way doesn't mean there isn't a way to improve. Different perspectives can reveal a lot about a situation. Of course, Farrell would be able to see with somewhat of a different point of view in that he hasn't been with the Sox for 2 years. Agree with Nip about the Cafardo thumbs up on Ausmus--that worries me as well.

#17 rembrat


  • SoSH Member


  • 23112 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 03:38 PM

Anecdotally speaking, has any player that has played with him come out with such forceful support for Tek as manager as they have for Brad Ausmus?


Tek isn't a candidate for a managerial job though. The moment he is, reporters will find his ex-teammates and ask them what they think, and you'll have your support.

#18 redsoxstiff


  • hip-tossed Yogi in a bar fight


  • 6657 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 03:51 PM

Nick Cafardo wants Ausmus, so by definition that makes me a Farrell guy


I needed a break from all this crap...Fucky you Nipper...

#19 redsoxstiff


  • hip-tossed Yogi in a bar fight


  • 6657 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 04:04 PM

Sure, but was he? Tek has that reputation and we all know its just Fastball Junction all day. How do we separate fact from baseball media hyperbole?


Did media keep Ausmus and Varitek employed earning wholesome dollars or was it knowledgeable Fos laying out scudi and players/ and certainly pitchers...?

The media have sources all over the place like flyshit...so I give it creedence with a scewed eyeball...even CHBF...
WE may resent it but we are always bottom feeders and the last to KNOW...

#20 Average Reds


  • SoSH Member


  • 10118 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 04:15 PM

The poll contains something of a trick question.

The Sox have already "picked" Farrell because if he wasn't their choice they wouldn't be talking compensation with the Jays. So if we see Ausmus as the manager it doesn't mean they picked him as much as it means that Farrell was not available to them.

Either choice works for me, but based on what I know - mercifully little - I'd prefer Ausmus.

#21 SoxinSeattle

  • 560 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 04:29 PM

The poll contains something of a trick question.

The Sox have already "picked" Farrell because if he wasn't their choice they wouldn't be talking compensation with the Jays. So if we see Ausmus as the manager it doesn't mean they picked him as much as it means that Farrell was not available to them.

Either choice works for me, but based on what I know - mercifully little - I'd prefer Ausmus.


Not neccessarily. They need to know what the Jays are asking for Farrell before they can make a decision on who to go with.

#22 Marbleheader


  • SoSH Member


  • 7087 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 04:42 PM

I'll take either one. I just want it settled before the World Series. Show you can function as a remotely competent and efficient organization and not the bumbling bufoons of the past few years.

#23 Average Reds


  • SoSH Member


  • 10118 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 04:48 PM

Not neccessarily. They need to know what the Jays are asking for Farrell before they can make a decision on who to go with.


If the Sox were merely asking to establish whether it was even worth coming after Farrell, then yeah. But if the reports are right, they cleared that hurdle a while ago and are now actively negotiating compensation. And you don't get to that stage unless he's your first choice.

Reports could be wrong, of course.

#24 Trlicek's Whip

  • 2951 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 05:01 PM

Farrell, since he's got manager experience.

His record with the Jays means very little to me. Torre had five losing seasons with the Mets to start his managerial career.

Francona was under .500 in his first four seasons (PHI). And his winning percentage after his first 324 games was .441, which is worse than Farrell's .475 clip.

I could care less that Ausmus is a New Englander, or if he's fancy with the booklearning. There's not enough actual anecdotal evidence aside from "catchers make good managers" etc. Wasn't the "he's saber-friendly" chased down as wishcasting?

And comping him to Varitek is strawman faint praise since no one agrees on how much credit Tek should actually get for things like any of the Sox's pitching staff's success during his tenure - or the recent 2011 Sox clubhouse meltdown while he was a storied veteran player.

Edited by Trlicek's Whip, 19 October 2012 - 05:04 PM.


#25 Trlicek's Whip

  • 2951 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 05:03 PM

The only issue is whether Farrell is favored because he's going to be the FO's company man. If that's the impetus behind the hire, then I'm against it. If it's the familiarity with Boston, the players, the pitchers, the FO, and the atmosphere in general, then he's as good a choice as any.

#26 NHbeau


  • hates latinos/bay staters


  • 579 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 06:26 PM

Ausmus all day, everyday. Though I suspect Farrell is the guy who gets the job. Either way I guess it's ok, but give me Ausmus. Paying anything...let alone of value for the privilege to pay Farrell is pretty dumb for a team in dire need of a rebuild. And the word from Toronto is a "25 man" level player? You run the other way if your smart.

#27 Rovin Romine

  • 2933 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 07:23 PM

Hard to say, I went with Farrell, Farrell.

My concern is that we're playing a bunch of younger guys, plus potentially good but issue-laden pitchers (Buch, Lester, Lackey, Bard.)

Farrell is more of a known factor for most - which may not be a good thing. The sox collapsed over the past calendar year. Whatever was "the Red Sox way of doing things" needs to change. Farrell may not be the guy to change that. He will also be the manager, not reprising the role of pitching coach. That said, the pitching coach will be doing things the way Farrell did them, I'm sure. So Farrell might be Tito II - and I don't know if Tito II is the right manager for these particular red sox.

Ausmus is the opposite side of the coin. No experience at managing. Could be fantastic, could be a disaster. Maybe he favors vets, etc. We just don't know.

Color me crazy, but if it's a play-the-kids year, Tony Pena on a short contract might be the way to go.

#28 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15162 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 07:32 PM

i wonder if they can hire Farrell and also have Ausmus on staff, maybe as bench coach. that would be a Sox thing to do


Why would Ausmus want to do that. Better question, why would Farrell want that?

If Nip is right and Cafardo wants Ausmus, I want Farrell.

#29 redsoxstiff


  • hip-tossed Yogi in a bar fight


  • 6657 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 07:39 PM

Why would Ausmus want to do that. Better question, why would Farrell want that?

If Nip is right and Cafardo wants Ausmus, I want Farrell.


I gave a hearty fuck you to Nip...You ain't no exception...Fuck you and Ryan while I'm at it...

#30 Sprowl


  • mikey lowell of the sandbox


  • 20644 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 07:44 PM

Farrell across the board. The pitchers need someone they can trust are terrified by.


Knowing nothing about Ausmus but the accounts posted in here, I favor Ausmus. Farrell was a fine pitching coach who instituted some valuable programs (shoulder strength monitoring among them), and he would have been a great choice for manager if the Red Sox had melted down under Tito in 2010 rather than 2011. Hiring Farrell after 2012 smacks of fighting the last war.

Carl Philipp Gottfried von Clausewitz wants Ausmus. That's good enough for me.

#31 Savin Hillbilly


  • SoSH Member


  • 11412 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 07:46 PM

Why would Ausmus want to do that.


The answer to that question is simple, and comes in the form of a question: given the universal acclaim for his personal qualities and baseball acumen, why is it that the Sox didn't just hire him on the spot?

Bench coaching for the Sox would give Ausmus the one thing he doesn't already have: experience on the management side of the dugout.

I think the best argument against it is that given the fact that the job search seems to have come down to Farrell vs. Ausmus, hiring Ausmus to back up Farrell seems a little too much like bet-hedging and might be unfair to Farrell. But I can't see a downside to it for Ausmus.

Edited by Savin Hillbilly, 19 October 2012 - 07:47 PM.


#32 Rough Carrigan


  • reasons within Reason


  • 16547 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 07:57 PM

Knowing nothing about Ausmus but the accounts posted in here, I favor Ausmus. Farrell was a fine pitching coach who instituted some valuable programs (shoulder strength monitoring among them), and he would have been a great choice for manager if the Red Sox had melted down under Tito in 2010 rather than 2011. Hiring Farrell after 2012 smacks of fighting the last war.

Carl Philipp Gottfried von Clausewitz wants Ausmus. That's good enough for me.

Well said. This gets at exactly the reason why the Farrell pursuit feels slightly unsettling. I don't know that it's a true assessment of the situation but one can certainly entertain that notion that it is.

#33 jacklamabe65


  • A New Frontier butt boy


  • 6005 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 08:05 PM

Pinky Higgins was an experienced manager as well.

The entire 2012 Toronto season is unsettling, and I am not talking about the Jays' injuries.

If Lucky wants Farrell, then I definitely would go the opposite way. Brad Ausmus all the way..

#34 rembrat


  • SoSH Member


  • 23112 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 08:51 PM

Why would Ausmus want to do that. Better question, why would Farrell want that?


To get experience? Joe Girardi was Joe Torre's bench coach before he become a skipper.

#35 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15162 posts

Posted 19 October 2012 - 10:04 PM

Right but Joe Girardi wasn't the runner up to the job, that ultimately went to Torre.

#36 radsoxfan


  • SoSH Member


  • 7680 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 01:54 AM

I dont blame Farrell for the record in Toronto. I blame him for sucking in Toronto.

Want Ausmus. Expect Farrell.

I hope to be proven wrong (either with my expectation of who gets the job or Farrell's performance if he wins out)

Edited by radsoxfan, 20 October 2012 - 02:04 AM.


#37 someoneanywhere

  • 3154 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 06:37 AM

I don't have the Farrell-fear, as is evidenced in other threads.

I'm just getting the sense that Toronto is pushing too hard a bargain on this, given the weakness of their own position with Farrell. If they want to keep him, go ahead and extend him. And if not, he can't possibly be worth a spot on the 25-man.

I wouldn't mind Ausmus at all -- although no one has mentioned that he lacks meaningful experience evaluating and developing the young players who the organization intends to build around. I don't just mean the young guys on the MLB roster; I mean he lacks experience from an organizational level, from top to bottom, which is one of the main reasons the FO seeks Farrell. Saying all that, I'll wager the Sox back off the asking price and end up taking a leap with Ausmus. And wager it is -- punditry -- since none of us has a clue.

#38 maufman


  • SoSH Member


  • 12077 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 06:56 AM

Are we all being good students and not fighting the hypothetical, or are we taking Gammo's report at face value?

Sure, Gammo used to have legendary sources. And even after he lost his fastball, he had unrivaled access to the Sox' FO -- but I always assumed that was largely due to his relationship with Theo. With Theo gone, do we think Gammo is still a FO mouthpiece in this case?

I ask because I'm a Wallach guy.

Edit: and the "25 man" rumors could be paving the way for Sweeney to go to Toronto, which would be a terrific result if Farrell is the guy. Even Nava would be better than a fringe prospect like SC Carpenter or Zach Stewart.

Edited by maufman, 20 October 2012 - 06:57 AM.


#39 Van Everyman


  • SoSH Member


  • 7284 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 08:21 AM

FWIW:

@gehrig38: Sox can't lose in this one. Farrell = stud, DHale is going to be awesome if he gets his shot and hearing amazing things about Ausmus



#40 RedOctober3829


  • SoSH Member


  • 16026 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 08:35 AM

Buster Olney on Sportscenter: Toronto now realizes it's a fait accompli because Farrell will eventually go to Red Sox next year anyways. Expects Farrell to become the new manager and it will cost Boston a "midlevel prospect."

#41 Rasputin


  • Will outlive SeanBerry


  • 26054 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 09:03 AM

Buster Olney on Sportscenter: Toronto now realizes it's a fait accompli because Farrell will eventually go to Red Sox next year anyways. Expects Farrell to become the new manager and it will cost Boston a "midlevel prospect."


As long as mid level is a euphemism for middle aged, I'm good with that.

#42 bosockboy


  • SoSH Member


  • 6951 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 09:11 AM

Buster Olney on Sportscenter: Toronto now realizes it's a fait accompli because Farrell will eventually go to Red Sox next year anyways. Expects Farrell to become the new manager and it will cost Boston a "midlevel prospect."


Well....he wouldn't if the Sox hired another candidate.

#43 RedOctober3829


  • SoSH Member


  • 16026 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 09:48 AM

Well....he wouldn't if the Sox hired another candidate.

Ssshh....Buster was on a roll there.

#44 bob burda

  • 589 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 10:34 AM

As long as mid level is a euphemism for middle aged, I'm good with that.

Hey now, some of us like Atch, even with his wonky elbow. I would not give them Atch.

#45 Rasputin


  • Will outlive SeanBerry


  • 26054 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 10:46 AM

Hey now, some of us like Atch, even with his wonky elbow. I would not give them Atch.


I love Atch

#46 pjr

  • 454 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 12:45 PM

Must be further along than people think if this is true.

Jen Royle@Jen_Royle
Source: The Red Sox have already worked out the financial parameters of Farrell's contract if a trade was to be completed with Toronto

#47 SoxScout


  • Maalox Territory


  • 30161 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 01:05 PM

Is she related to Farrell or something? She has had all the details for two years now.

#48 someoneanywhere

  • 3154 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 01:05 PM

That would actually be a meaningful tweet if they'd worked out the parameters with Farrell.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users