I haven't seen Kapler's name thrown around, but he seems like a candidate for an interview at the very least. Managed Greenville in 2007, almost got the Dodgers job, and as Director of Player Development he's graduated some serious talent in LA.
Also he's jacked and the Sox don't hit dingers.
Neither did he.
The Dodgers (Roberts) and D-Backs (Lovullo).
Not sure how I forgot Lovullo. And I had thought Roberts managed in San Deigo, but he was just a 1st base coach there. So I rescind that point.
I'm going to laugh when "nobody can be worse than Farrell" folks are calling for manager X's head next July.
Yeah, this. I'm just not seeing a great option out there so at best, I think they'll have a similar guy with a new face and half of SoSH will be calling for his head for leaving a starter in one batter too long in early July.
Of course it depends on who they replace him with, but Farrell was not a good manager. The fact that he led a team people thought would win the division to win the division is great, but too many times over the years he has looked really bad.
As has been proven pretty conclusively the last 24 hours, the case for this claim is extremely weak. The stats we can look at to try and pin down some of his value grade him out, at worst, as average. In some cases, they grade him out as pretty damned good. And most of the anecdotal evidence for him being bad is full of presumptions and projection.
It's a shame Tito went, but after that 2011 September collapse, I'm not sure what you do.
Not overreact and drive the best Red Sox manager of our lifetimes (and arguably the best manager in the game today) out the door. The "change for the shaking things up" approach is almost always the wrong one, at least in baseball.
The Mets are apparently salivating over him. I have zero interest in getting into a bidding war over Joe Girardi. He's not worth it.
If he becomes available he is my immediate top choice. He's smart, statistically inclined, firm, well spoken, can command respect from players given his playing career and managing experience, and he's managed in a big market. In fact, he's a pretty good approximation of what John Farrell is right now, right down to driving his fans nuts with bullpen usage, substitutions, and being focused on the established plan (for whatever... base running, how to approach ABs, shifts, etc) enough that people think he's a slave to it. They're actually really similar managers, now that I think about it.
So, he'd be hated by all the same people who hate Farrell and he'd provide a solid floor which means the team would be unlikely to take a significant step back.