Jump to content


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

Photo

Farrell hired


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

#101 ScubaSteveAvery


  • the goats! think of the goats!


  • 6798 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 11:57 PM

But who led the world in injuries and that manager is gone? The MFY's had their share of injuries too and they won the AL East. So hard to accept that as an excuse.


It isn't an excuse. Not all injuries are created equal, and replacements aren't equal either. The Yankees losing Rivera isn't as big of deal, since they had signed a closer a year earlier to set up. Losing Bautista is huge. I'd say similar to the Sox losing Ortiz.

I'm just saying that it is difficult to evaluate how he really is as a manager based on team performance alone. It would be like evaluating Tito after the 2006 season. And I say this as somebody who is not in favor of Farrell becoming manager.

Farrell has question marks regarding the Escobar situation, and those sac bunt stats are terrible to look at, but I'm not sure how to evaluate him as a manager.

#102 Greg29fan


  • SoSH Member


  • 12661 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 11:59 PM

Mike Aviles: .282 OBP in 2012, lowest among AL batting-title qualifiers.


If they hand the job to Iglesias, somebody convince me a .282 OBP isn't going to look Ruthian.

Edited by Greg29fan, 21 October 2012 - 12:00 AM.


#103 The Gray Eagle


  • SoSH Member


  • 9217 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 12:01 AM

If Toronto wants Aviles because they are dumping Escobar, we should be asking for Escobar back. He's a good fielding SS who gets on base. That is what we've needed for years. Yes, there would be a PR hit, so do it now, months before spring training even starts.

#104 mauidano


  • Mai Tais for everyone!


  • 12563 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 12:02 AM

It isn't an excuse. Not all injuries are created equal, and replacements aren't equal either. The Yankees losing Rivera isn't as big of deal, since they had signed a closer a year earlier to set up. Losing Bautista is huge. I'd say similar to the Sox losing Ortiz.

I'm just saying that it is difficult to evaluate how he really is as a manager based on team performance alone. It would be like evaluating Tito after the 2006 season. And I say this as somebody who is not in favor of Farrell becoming manager.

Farrell has question marks regarding the Escobar situation, and those sac bunt stats are terrible to look at, but I'm not sure how to evaluate him as a manager.

Agreed. I gather Pedey was less than thrilled with Farrell as of a few days ago. This quote has been attributed to him
http://www.csnne.com...119&feedID=3352

It is what it is, here we go!

Edited by mauidano, 21 October 2012 - 12:03 AM.


#105 curly2

  • 2670 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 12:07 AM

Talent makes the manager. Get better players and make the current ones not suck. It's pretty simple. Fix the starters is job #1.


That's what scares me. Brett Lawrie didn't devlop this year the way most people expected. Farrell couldn't make Colby Rasmus, with all his talent, not suck, and he couldn't keep Ricky Romero from falling off a cliff.

#106 Dogman2


  • Yukon Cornelius


  • 10960 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 12:07 AM

Agreed. I gather Pedey was less than thrilled with Farrell as of a few days ago. This quote has been attributed to him
http://www.csnne.com...119&feedID=3352

It is what it is, here we go!


I see nothing in that article that attributes the quotes to Dustin. Explain please?

#107 Pumpsie


  • The Kilimanjaro of bullshit


  • 10577 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 12:14 AM

John Farrell for Mike Aviles. Hey, I can live with that. I'm actually looking forward to see how the Sox players react to Farrell next year. If they thought Valentine was tough on them....hoo, boy!

#108 RedOctober3829


  • SoSH Member


  • 15704 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 12:15 AM

That's what scares me. Brett Lawrie didn't devlop this year the way most people expected. Farrell couldn't make Colby Rasmus, with all his talent, not suck, and he couldn't keep Ricky Romero from falling off a cliff.


This is in part why I am not on board with Farrell as manager. I hope I'm wrong, but that's why they play the games. At this point last year, did anyone see Baltimore as a playoff team?

#109 Ed Hillel


  • Wants to be startin somethin


  • 41499 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 12:16 AM

Talent makes the manager. Get better players and make the current ones not suck. It's pretty simple. Fix the starters is job #1.


Yeah, this is baseball, not football. However, what managers can do in baseball is get in the way, particularly in big markets, which is why you don't hire an egomaniac like Bobby Valentine. The reason I'm happy with this hire is that we can reasonably expect that Farrell will be able to handle the media and won't seek out reporters trying to make stories where they shouldn't be written. I don't envision him getting in the way of his team, particularly given that he's already spent time in Boston under the Sox manager who handled those seeking distractions inside and outside the clubhouse better than any other. I'm willing to give anyone who can do that a chance, though I do believe that Ben is ultimately the guy who will be responsible for the team's success, or lack thereof (gulp). I must say that getting rid of "seventh best shortstop in baseball" Mike Aviles is at least a good start. Now trade Ellsbury + for Andrus, and we're off to a great start!

Edited by Ed Hillel, 21 October 2012 - 12:27 AM.


#110 Andrew


  • broke his neck in costa rica


  • 9477 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 12:22 AM

Anyone in this thread comparing Valentine to Farrell makes no sense. I'm not convinced Farrell is any sort of savior, but I'd be shocked if he was a negative the way almost everyone thought Valentine would be... and turned out to be.

Agreed. I gather Pedey was less than thrilled with Farrell as of a few days ago. This quote has been attributed to him
http://www.csnne.com...119&feedID=3352

It is what it is, here we go!


That sounds nothing like Dustin Pedroia at all. I don't buy this for a second.

Edited by Andrew, 21 October 2012 - 12:24 AM.


#111 Savin Hillbilly


  • SoSH Member


  • 11196 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 12:26 AM

So the whole search process was basically just a charade.


They had no way of knowing for sure that they'd be able to pry Farrell loose from Toronto, so they needed a few plan B guys. That's not a charade, that's just being smart.

#112 mt8thsw9th


  • anti-SoSHal


  • 13837 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 12:42 AM

Every man does have his price, but I have a hard time believing Youkilis would be keen on coming back to Boston after the mess that was 2012.

Plus, he'd be a part-time player in 2013. Part of the reason he was traded is because he was unhappy not being the starter. Why would he suddenly change his mind on that?

EDIT: Unless we get into, like, February and no one's made him an offer. But how likely is that?



Plus, he sucks, so let someone else pay 5 million for his last gasp and goatee.

#113 jtn46


  • SoSH Member


  • 6826 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 12:48 AM

Sounds good to me! I like Farrell and we know he was able to get through to at least a few pitchers where I don't think Valentine got through to anybody. Plus, he knows the division already.

I thought the timing with him leaving after the '10 season had the potential to create a drama when the Sox needed a manager and really wanted him, and it did where we had to endure Valentine for a year, but Toronto's injuries made this an easier transaction than I expected.

#114 rembrat


  • SoSH Member


  • 22674 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 01:11 AM

This is in part why I am not on board with Farrell as manager. I hope I'm wrong, but that's why they play the games. At this point last year, did anyone see Baltimore as a playoff team?


I'm confused. What are you saying? You want a manager that is going to make shitty players average and push above average players into superstardom?

I love the move and I love that Mike Aviles is finally off this team. He should have never been given the starters job.

#115 EvilEmpire

  • 4350 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 01:42 AM

The fact that Farrell understands and presumably buys into the organizational philosophy and already has a good relationship with the GM and the front office is a good thing. It probably isn't what Farrell did in Toronto that matters so much to the Sox as how he does things. Process more than results.

Sox fans should be pretty pleased. Easier to rebuild a team when everyone is on the same sheet of music.

#116 E5 Yaz


  • Transcends message boarding


  • 24583 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 02:01 AM

And now, the coaching staff? Will anyone stay aboard?

I could see Ochoa staying and, perhaps now, Tuck.

But that would leave openings at hitting, pitching, bench and 3B coaches.

Guesses?

#117 SoxScout


  • Maalox Territory


  • 30160 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 02:06 AM

Butterfield 3B from Bangor, ME

Lovullo 1B everyone knows about

No idea if they are the types like Mags that would survive managerial changes.

#118 Papelbon's Poutine

  • 4828 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 02:19 AM

Butterfield 3B from Bangor, ME

Lovullo 1B everyone knows about

No idea if they are the types like Mags that would survive managerial changes.


Does anyone know the contract status of these guys though? They'd be great hires, but I guess unless Toronto allows their new manager to bring in his own staff, I can't see them letting us fleece their entire coaching staff. Can/should the sox wait that long to find out?

#119 mabrowndog


  • Ask me about total zone...or paint


  • 37161 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 02:33 AM

Butterfield's been with the Jays for a decade in various coaching roles at the MLB level. He was a finalist when they hired Farrell, and is bound to be a candidate again to replace him. I doubt he's going anywhere.

#120 bosockboy


  • SoSH Member


  • 6811 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 02:57 AM

Rick Peterson seems to be a strong possibility for pitching coach, and offering Lovullo the bench coach gig would be a promotion (he may end up managing Toronto though).

Idea for hitting coach....Rudy Jaramillo.

#121 SoxScout


  • Maalox Territory


  • 30160 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 04:33 AM

Cafardo (I know, I know) questions a Peterson and Farrell mix

The pitching coach on the 2013 Red Sox may be the most important uniformed member of the organization. Choosing the right person is going to fall on Farrell and Cherington.Farrell could go with Bruce Walton, his pitching coach in Toronto, which whom the Blue Jays pitchers enjoyed working. But the results weren’t impressive, and ace lefthander Ricky Romero had an awful season, while other starters got hurt.

One coach who would be a factor is Rick Peterson, the Orioles’ director of pitching. But would the Sox want a coach this strong in his views? Would Farrell want to relinquish the majority of his say in the pitching and allow Peterson to do his thing? Or does Farrell have someone else in mind?


Buster_ESPN: Torey Lovullo is likely to be a prominent candidate for the Jays' managerial job. Highly regarded within the Toronto organization.

Buster_ESPN: Wouldn't be a surprise to see the highly respected Brian Butterfield, a native of Maine, to someone wind up on the Red Sox staff. We'll see.


But since he left the DL Aug. 25, he has hit .305 with a .794 OPS. He boosted his season batting average to .256 and his OPS to .730. Without naming names, Lind said the message he and others received at times this year was to approach the plate looking for a walk. At times, he said, that mindset related to the team’s dearth of baserunners, a situation that became acute in August after injuries struck down Jose Bautista, J.P. Arencibia and Brett Lawrie. “Sometimes there’s an environment around here that people want us to walk,” Lind said. “You just can’t do that with the pitching you’re facing in this league, in this division.”

http://sports.nation...ssive-approach/

Edited by SoxScout, 21 October 2012 - 05:28 AM.


#122 JohnnyK

  • 979 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 05:22 AM

But who led the world in injuries and that manager is gone? The MFY's had their share of injuries too and they won the AL East. So hard to accept that as an excuse.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/2012-disabled-list-summary/

Granted, this does not take who the teams lost to the DL into consideration. I wonder if anyone's done a list for expected WAR lost (using eg. Marcel or Zips projections).

#123 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 27861 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 06:10 AM

Fantastic. Organization has a manager they support and are on the same page with regarding philosophy who will be here long term- players will fall in line. He understands the market, his bosses, many of the players. A pitching savant. Knows the division. Compensation was a guy who had a nice WAR but who was buried and wasn't coming back. There's some concerns, but they exist with any hire. Nice to have this over with, and now he focus can return to on the field matters. What a concept.

#124 Clears Cleaver


  • SoSH Member


  • 8223 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 06:30 AM

Edes tweeted that Lind is not part of this deal

#125 Van Everyman


  • SoSH Member


  • 7182 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 07:00 AM

@Buster_ESPN: Jays have been furious with what they perceive to be Boston's tampering with Farrell, but it was smart of them to move past that.


First I heard of this -- tho par for the course with the criticism of this ownership group it seems.

(null)

#126 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 27861 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 07:49 AM

First I heard of this -- tho par for the course with the criticism of this ownership group it seems.

(null)


Eh, every situation like this involves "tampering". In this day and age, seems unavoidable. Wonder if there's a way for GM's and managers to have early exit penalties added to future contracts; some way to avoid this problem for small to mid revenue clubs. That being said, if Farrell (or Theo) wants out, you want to let them do that. Can't have a GM or manager in charge who isn't fully committed.

#127 Marbleheader


  • SoSH Member


  • 7053 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 07:59 AM

Agreed. I gather Pedey was less than thrilled with Farrell as of a few days ago. This quote has been attributed to him
http://www.csnne.com...119&feedID=3352

It is what it is, here we go!


It's not Pedroia, he hates Giardi's face according to multiple sources on the radio.

Glad they got this done and didn't give up a prospect.

#128 gatorgurl67

  • 1801 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 08:38 AM

Jon Lester@JLester31
Welcome back John!! Can't wait to get back to work!! #RedSox
At least Lester is happy...

#129 Corsi


  • Wes Chamberlain's Sasha Rockets


  • 9137 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 08:40 AM

Jon Lester@JLester31
Welcome back John!! Can't wait to get back to work!! #RedSox
At least Lester is happy...


This is what I like to see. If Farrell can return Lester to where he was while he was pitching coach, this signing will have been worth it.

#130 iayork

  • 151 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 08:45 AM

So what would we call "success" for Farrell in 2013? Are we requiring an ALCS championship before we agree it's a good hire, or would 70 wins be an acceptable year?

Maybe it's too early to set the parameters until we see who's actually on the team going into the season, but there must be some criteria to decide if Farrell is doing OK. Some thoughts:

-Lester and Buchholz need to pitch a lot better. That's supposed to be Farrell's strength; if they underperform again, I think it's on him.
-Doubront needs to progress. He was one of the few bright spots this year, but he should be able to do better in his second full year. Again, supposed to be Farrell's strength
-Plate discipline needs to improve. Obviously that depends on your horses, but overall approach is surely something the manager has input on
-Media and clubhouse handling. A very low bar for improvement from this year, but we don't want to see any Youkilis or Escabar-like messes

What else are we looking for to say this was a decent move?

#131 dynomite

  • 4426 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 08:47 AM

It's not Pedroia, he hates Giardi's face according to multiple sources on the radio.


EDIT: NM


The fact that Farrell understands and presumably buys into the organizational philosophy and already has a good relationship with the GM and the front office is a good thing. It probably isn't what Farrell did in Toronto that matters so much to the Sox as how he does things. Process more than results.

Sox fans should be pretty pleased. Easier to rebuild a team when everyone is on the same sheet of music.


A thousand times this.

Everything about this organization works better when the Manager and the front of office have a good working relationship. The fact that they were willing to give Farrell four years is another good sign. This is about overhauling and restoring an organization, and that takes time.

EDIT: And as I posted in the other thread:

Jon Lester with Farrell: 108 GS, 54-23, 3.40 ERA, 134 ERA+, 8.6 K/9
Jon Lester since Farrell: 64 GS, 24-23, 4.17 ERA, 104 ERA+, 7.9 K/9

Clay Buchholz with Farrell: 62 GS, 29-21, 3.68 ERA, 123 ERA+, 7.0 K/9
Clay Buchholz since Farrell: 43 GS, 17-11, 4.24 ERA, 102 ERA+, 6.3 K/9

Daniel Bard with Farrell: 122 GP, 2.61 ERA, 139 ERA+, 10.1 K/9
Daniel Bard since Farrell: 87 GP, 4.62 ERA, 91 ERA+, 7.6 K/9 (obviously extenuating circumstance)

Hopefully the correlation implies causation. We'll find out soon enough.

Edited by dynomite, 21 October 2012 - 09:06 AM.


#132 NHbeau


  • hates latinos/bay staters


  • 577 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 08:48 AM

All in all even if you don't like Farrell, this was played very smartly. 4 candidates that all seemed smart choices, all interviewed in a reasonable time frame. If the deal falls through with Toronto the FO has MULTIPLE quality guys to pick from. They got their guy and Aviles doesn't seem like an overpay in my eyes like a B/C prospect would have been. He's a known quantity with likely little value as a trade chit. So well done as a whole. Reading from Edes article how this was on Cherington, and ownership basically gave him final say is another great sign about the direction this is going.

Edited by NHbeau, 21 October 2012 - 08:55 AM.


#133 kartvelo

  • 3719 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 08:59 AM

I would think that any improvement in pitching would be the primary responsibility of whatever pitching coach gets hired. Not Farrell's job. So any eager comparisons of performance with and without Farrell don't really apply, even if causation had been established.

#134 jacklamabe65


  • A New Frontier butt boy


  • 5977 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 09:01 AM

Because he was a farm director, it will be interesting to see how Farrell will develop the young players that will obviously form the core of this team by 2013-14.

#135 JimD

  • 4517 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 09:03 AM

Very happy with the process and I can live with the result. For the first time in thirteen months, the Boston Red Sox are not an MLB laughingstock.

Is anyone else besides me more than a little psyched at the thought of Farrell working with RDLR?

#136 MHead81

  • 529 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 09:04 AM

Dollars to donuts it's Cody Ross. He played for Girardi with the Marlins. (And might make sense for the Yankees as a Swisher replacement, sadly)

Are you confusing Joe Girardi with CSNNE's Mike Giradi?

#137 JimD

  • 4517 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 09:04 AM

I would think that any improvement in pitching would be the primary responsibility of whatever pitching coach gets hired. Not Farrell's job. So any eager comparisons of performance with and without Farrell don't really apply, even if causation had been established.


I have little doubt that Farrell will have primary input into the hiring of his pitching coach and will make sure they get someone who is on the same page with his philosophies.

#138 dynomite

  • 4426 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 09:05 AM

Are you confusing Joe Girardi with CSNNE's Mike Giradi?


Obviously. Didn't click the link. Sorry.

#139 Remagellan

  • 4090 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 09:08 AM

I would have preferred Ausmus. Hiring Farrell seems like a "turn back the clock" move. The problem is we have a "turn the page" roster.

Hopefully, he can turn around the pitching, because that's our best hope of fielding a competitive team.

#140 sfip


  • directly related to Marilyn Monroe


  • 7359 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 09:25 AM

He's arguably the best hope of turning around Lester and Bard.

#141 geoduck no quahog


  • SoSH Member


  • 5367 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 09:29 AM

Anyone hear from Stiffy? Is he ok?

#142 Sausage in Section 17


  • Poker Champ


  • 675 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 09:34 AM

Francona, Valentine, Farrell. One of these things is not like the other. It's curious how different not only the eventual winners are, but how the process in each of these cases played out. The way they quickly targeted 4 sharp guys, got it all done in a week, and picked their man seems much more reminiscent of how things played out when Tito got hired. Last year, it seems like we heard a list of recycled names, and then pretty quickly Valentine had been more or less anointed and got hired a few days later. It makes me think perhaps LL got reigned in and the team is again being run by baseball people. One can hope.

#143 The Gray Eagle


  • SoSH Member


  • 9217 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 09:37 AM

I'm not sold on Farrell being a good manager, and I hate the idea of giving up a major league payer to get a manager. But Farrell will be on the same page as the front office at least, and should not be creating issues and distractions the way Valentine did. And I didn't want Avlies back as our SS anyway, dumping him like this is a sign that the team knows they need to go get another SS, so I will take that as a good thing.

Farrell just has to be better than Valentine, and we will be getting a new SS, so things are already getting better.

So who are we getting back in this deal? It has to be someone that the teams agree was worth Aviles minus Farrrell, so not much at all I would expect, got to be some minor league reliever.

Edited by The Gray Eagle, 21 October 2012 - 09:51 AM.


#144 Dick Pole Upside

  • 3315 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 09:46 AM

Welcome back teacher's pet Julio "Butch" Farrell.

Along with TheoSmeo et al, it appears there's room to be "interviewed" for the 2013 rembrat role of gadfly.

Let's keep our fingers crossed that Jonny takes his earbuds out when Butch is trying to talk with him.

P.S. If it's Aviles for Lind, I'm okay with that.

#145 JMDurron

  • 4249 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 09:50 AM

I hope the Sox brass is correct here. But the Sox have been so profoundly wrong on player and staff evaluations the last few years, so forgive me if I don't give them the benefit of the doubt.


This is where I am as well. I have nothing against Farrell, but I have so little faith in any level of this organization right now that I am hesitant to believe in their #1 candidate for security guard, nevermind the manager position.

#146 Red(s)HawksFan

  • 4818 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 09:56 AM

Farrell is the guy they wanted last year and Toronto shut them down, leading to the ill-advised Bobby V era. I feel like had they gotten Farrell last winter, a lot of the bullshit that has happened in the last 12 months, most of it centered around Valentine, might have been avoided. Better late than never. I'm not super excited but I'm also not at all disappointed by this hire. Having the entirety of the management, from the owners down through the field manager, is going to make a world of difference for this franchise.

#147 Trautwein's Degree


  • a Connecticut bicycle attorney in General Motor's Court


  • 9836 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 09:57 AM

I'm not sold on Farrell being a good manager, and I hate the idea of giving up a major league payer to get a manager.


The odds of the Sox offering Aviles arbitration were low. He made 1.2 million last year and will make more next year. Second half OPS was .610 (OBP: .280 SLG: .330). Whenever the Sox contend again, whether it is next year or 3 years from now - Aviles would not have been on the roster.

#148 catomatic


  • thinks gen turgidson is super mean!!!


  • 726 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 09:58 AM

It makes me think perhaps LL got reigned in and the team is again being run by baseball people. One can hope.


Nothing that hasn't been conjectured upon and basically proven, in deed if not word, but from another quarter: Buddy of mine found himself in a supermarket line with Joe Girardi and his brother a few months ago, and being a sox fan, he asked him about Theo's departure. Girardi intimated that Theo and the baseball ops people had lost control of this organization "a long, long time ago".

#149 Toe Nash

  • 2937 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 10:04 AM

I'm not sold on Farrell being a good manager, and I hate the idea of giving up a major league payer to get a manager. But Farrell will be on the same page as the front office at least, and should not be creating issues and distractions the way Valentine did. And I didn't want Avlies back as our SS anyway, dumping him like this is a sign that the team knows they need to go get another SS, so I will take that as a good thing.

Farrell just has to be better than Valentine, and we will be getting a new SS, so things are already getting better.


This is pretty much where I'm at.

What do we want Farrell to help with particularly? Helping young guys, and getting the old guys to figure things out, right?

Farrell's track record with young players in Tor isn't great. Yes they had injuries but they had a lot of talented guys who didn't improve or regressed (Lawrie, Rasmus, Romero, Arencibia, Escobar). The only success stories are Encarnacion and Morrow (who always had a lot of talent). He had success helping young pitchers during his time as pitching coach, so that's encouraging for Doubront et al, but there was also a decent amount of criticism of him for having guys rely on the cutter too much and not necessarily adjusting.

For all the talk of him fixing our pitchers, Buchholz was excellent once he shook off the rust so he doesn't really need fixing, Lester's peripherals weren't that far from his norms (what hurt him was poor pitching with runners on / terrible #s in Fenway) and Bard is a mystery wrapped in an enigma (If he doesn't get "fixed" in Spring Training will Farrell even be able to help? That would be the AAA coaches).

He may get credit for "fixing" these guys when really we just had a full healthy offseason from Clay and Lester not getting frustrated by poor strike zones (and not getting left out for 11 runs y a joke of a manager would probably help his ERA, too - if Bobby had taken Lester out after the first inning when it was clear he didn't have it his season ERA would have been 4.62 instead of 4.82).

He doesn't seem to have much success with hitters and we just lost our in my opinion quite good hitting coach because one of the better franchises in the league decided to pay him more than us, so that's not encouraging. That said, hopefully a good hitting coach can be found.

Beyond those three, there's not a lot of old players left for him to help with. It would be nice to see what he could do to help with Beckett, but that's no longer an issue. Lackey I guess, but I don't know that he's going to learn any new tricks -- just being healthy will help.

That said, I'm very glad it's completed quickly and everyone is on the same page so they can move onto getting coaches and adding to the talent of the team.

#150 Savin Hillbilly


  • SoSH Member


  • 11196 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 10:07 AM

It's not Pedroia, he hates Giardi's face according to multiple sources on the radio.


1. The phrase "Last year, there were a bunch of guys I didn't know or care about" eliminates everybody who was new this year.

2. He seems to have strong opinions about the handling of pitchers, but there are hints in the wording (e.g. "you can't make 'em make the pitch") that make me think he's not a pitcher himself.

3. The reference to his friends around other clubs could imply a veteran, and perhaps one who has played for multiple organizations, though neither of these is a lock.

4. Can't be Ortiz (unless he calls himself "David" to reporters).

5. He's a bit of a loose cannon, and possibly a wee bit of a douche.

And the winner is......

Posted Image




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users