Let's Talk about the manager -- The John Farrell Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
58,871
San Andreas Fault
About Gomes not being pinch-run for by Berry, one of the myriad of analysts I heard last night said it's because "Gomes is one of the smartest baserunners in the game." He said on the foul pop by Salty that Prince should have had, Gomes went back, tagged up, and was most of the way to third base, implying he would have got there if Prince had caught it. Anyone see if that was true (Gomes tagging up and going?). All moot because Princey blew it, thank you veggie boy.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Not having anyone ready when Clay started scuffling seemed to me to be the only real mistake Farrell made.  Maybe he decides to stick with Clay anyways, but I thought not having anyone ready and depriving himself of the option wasnt very good managing.
 
Im fine with not using Berry in that spot, good chance that if Salty pops out or they get to two outs Farrell pulls the trigger.
 
I liked the decision to have Ortiz hit a grand slam.
 

findguapo

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2006
982
 

TomRicardo said:
 
Berry made sense.  If Salty gets on with a walk or single that doesn't get Gomes home I switch Berry out with Salty to try to avoid the double play.

 
 
If Salty gets on, a double play still ends the game, there were zero outs. Also, if Salty had gotten on, Leyland probably would have walked Drew to load the bases. Berry would have been wasted running for Salty.
 
KillerBs said:
 
There is a whole subset of singles that exist where Berry's speed makes the difference.
 
There is absolutely no way you send anyone home on a single to the outfield with no outs in that situation unless they can make it without  any doubt. Pinch running to get Berry home from 2nd with no outs on a single should never be in consideration there.
 

PaulinMyrBch

Don't touch his dog food
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2003
8,316
MYRTLE BEACH!!!!
KillerBs said:
 
There is a whole subset of singles that exist where Berry's speed makes the difference. And then there are the various scenarios where his speed gets him to 3rd on an out or a short WP etc, as noted above.  Gomes is a good baserunner true but Berry is a lot better of course. I would have thought it clear that Berry's speed increases the chances of scoring there What makes it an easy decision IMO is that you are giving up nothing to remove Gomes from the game there. Nava is a better hitter and fielder, right? You could have even PR Berry and left him in LF and improved the defense. The only rationale I can come up with is saving the PR for later, which also makes little to no sense in this context. 
 
In any event, it seems odd to be harping on this after such a monumental victory. It worked out -- no harm, no foul, I suppose. And the PR Berry issue pales in comparison as far as I am concerned to the absurdly slow hook in the 6th. (By the way, I trust Farrell learned last night that Workman is not a good option for Hi-Lev moments -- topped out at 91, wild and little more than a show me breaking ball. Give me Dempster (no give me Tazawa) over that). 
 
To be fair, I do like that Farrell stuck with Middlebrooks in the 8th and not just post facto. As much as I love me some Bogie, I was glad to see Farrell stick with WMB in that spot. This is one of those cases where in the face of high uncertainty it makes sense to me to show some confidence in the starter.
I think you're overgeneralizing the situation.  It's easy to say things that you've just said in very vague terms and act like they are fact. 
 
"The increased chances of Berry scoring there..."
"A whole subset of singles that exist where Berry's speed make the difference..."
"Various scenarios where Berry gets to third on an out..."
 
If you are going to use words that imply large amount of things, asking for a few specific examples doesn't seem out of line. So please, describe to me the out to the right side of the infield that moves Berry to third, but not Gomes.  Or the ball to the left side that moves either. Or the value of speed with a drawn in infield. 
 
I'm simply saying I don't think the difference is as great as you do, unless you need to steal a base.
 

Dick Drago

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 28, 2002
1,311
Lose Remerswaal said:
Why did Napoli hit for Carp against the rightie in the 8th?  I understand the defensive improvement, but Mike hasn't hit anything in weeks.
Carp did twist his ankle on his DP groundout. Maybe he was still hurting
 

teddykgb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,016
Chelmsford, MA
findguapo said:
 
 
 
 
If Salty gets on, a double play still ends the game, there were zero outs. Also, if Salty had gotten on, Leyland probably would have walked Drew to load the bases. Berry would have been wasted running for Salty.
 
 
There is absolutely no way you send anyone home on a single to the outfield with no outs in that situation unless they can make it without  any doubt. Pinch running to get Berry home from 2nd with no outs on a single should never be in consideration there.
 
 
This is way too declarative.  Of course there are situations where you'd send someone home on a single to the outfield, and there's the very real difference in speed between Gomes and Berry that might change the calculus of "make it without any doubt".  It is definitely a subset of singles to the OF, but in this situation I would want my manager to maximize the chance that a random hit ends the game.  To me, saving your fastest runner for a future PR situation is sort of like saving your closer for a future save opportunity.  The hi-lev, win the game opportunity presented itself in the 9th, I'd personally take the delta between Gomes and Berry there as a proactive way to try to go get the game.  If a better PR spot came up later for Berry, then that means we managed to not score with a runner on 2nd and no outs in the bottom of the 9th.  We might be down one run or more by this time, and there's a decent chance we're several innings into extras as well (we were heading to the lower half of our order).
 
That said, I suspect a lot of this decision boils down to how large a difference in speed you think there is between Berry and Gomes.  I see him as a big musclehead lumbering type, which makes the decision to swap him out as a massive gain in speed.  There are several in this thread who seem to have an opinion of him that is more measured, plus some conventional wisdom that he is a "great baserunner".  I don't know how to fact check that, but if the manager thinks he's even above average, then it's probably an entirely different calculus there for Farrell than it is for me in my head.  He's in a much better position than I am to know the delta in speed between the two, plus try to weave in "baserunning instincts" and other things.   One point in Gomes' favor that I find much easier to process today after the win than I probably would have after a loss is that he was probably beating out Iglesias' throw regardless of the bad throw.  That wasn't a complete slow roller and we've all seen first hand how strong Iglesias' arm is.  He's probably faster than he looks.
 
One final point, because I really enjoy this thread in spite of how frequently it gets shitty.  This idea that all of these decisions are some sort of zero sum game where one side is completely right and the other is completely wrong just doesn't make sense to me.  We are, in almost all circumstances, talking about some of the toughest decisions a manager is asked to make in the heat of the moment.  Trying to understand what type of reasoning went into a decision is really interesting.  Trying to shut down discussion and prove that other posters aren't smart isn't.  Not really an accusation lobbed at anyone in particular, more of a general observation that I think this thread is far more interesting when people are bouncing ideas off of one another than when people are trying to be "right".   
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
I think what we're seeing here is that Farrell's decision to leave Gomes in to run was, from a tactical standpoint, a completely defensible choice.  And I say that as someone who, during the game thread, advocated for pinch-running Berry there.
 

KillerBs

New Member
Nov 16, 2006
906
PaulinMyrBch said:
I think you're overgeneralizing the situation.  It's easy to say things that you've just said in very vague terms and act like they are fact. 
 
"The increased chances of Berry scoring there..."
"A whole subset of singles that exist where Berry's speed make the difference..."
"Various scenarios where Berry gets to third on an out..."
 
If you are going to use words that imply large amount of things, asking for a few specific examples doesn't seem out of line. So please, describe to me the out to the right side of the infield that moves Berry to third, but not Gomes.  Or the ball to the left side that moves either. Or the value of speed with a drawn in infield. 
 
I'm simply saying I don't think the difference is as great as you do, unless you need to steal a base.
 
...ground ball towards the SS hole, short WP, fly ball to medium CF, foul pop up to the stands at 1b, I am sure there are more.
 
You also force the Tigers to defend against the steal of 3b, which effects infield defense.
 
I am not saying the difference is great. But if there is an increase in odds in scoring with Berry at 2b over Gomes (1-2-5%?). I think the move has to be made there, given that that increase in odds = an increase in winning the game, and the downside risk to not making the move is non-existent.  
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,368
From way back in March at WEEI:

 
The player who might exude the qualities Farrell is looking for is Gomes, whom Maddon calls, "One of the best baserunners I've ever had, anywhere."
 
Gomes hasn't made his living off of stolen bases, by any means (although he did total 53 swipes in his first three minor league seasons). But what he does understand is the value of the extra base, as was evidenced by him becoming the only player in the majors during the '10 season to go from first to third 15 times while hitting as many as 15 home runs.
 
"He to me fits what we’re trying to do, and could be a guy who can steal more bases than he has, because he can move for a big guy and likes to," Farrell said. "He gets it. We had a play two nights ago there was a read on a ball in the outfield if the instincts and reaction was right they should have been standing on third base, and the guy wasn’t. He was quick to point that out, and not just to me."
 
Gomes is clearly all-in when it comes to the new manager's mantra.
 
"You don’t get fast in an offseason. You don’t go from 0 to 40 (stolen bases)," the outfielder said. "It’s like my outfield. Years I DH'd, I always worked hard on my outfield. Years I haven’t ran I always stayed up with working on my running. I would definitely like to turn it on. And what John is emphasizing this year is baserunning."
 
 
We know Berry is a good base-stealer, but is he a good baserunner too? Plus, having him come in cold vs. Gomes who's been playing the entire game. I have no issue with how that was handled.
 

PaulinMyrBch

Don't touch his dog food
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2003
8,316
MYRTLE BEACH!!!!
KillerBs said:
 
...ground ball towards the SS hole, short WP, fly ball to medium CF, foul pop up to the stands at 1b, I am sure there are more.
 
You also force the Tigers to defend against the steal of 3b, which effects infield defense.
 
I am not saying the difference is great. But if there is an increase in odds in scoring with Berry at 2b over Gomes (1-2-5%?). I think the move has to be made there, given that that increase in odds = an increase in winning the game, and the downside risk to not making the move is non-existent.  
There were 0 outs, you don't make the first out at third. So IMO
Neither move
Neither move
Neither move
Both move
 
You don't steal third with 0 outs.  I don't care who is over there.
 

soxtalon

New Member
Jul 13, 2005
154
Albany, NY
I think at the very least leaving Gomes in was defensible.  Either call Farrell made had it's pros/cons.   BUT I'll say that Gomes smart baserunning was one of those things that became clear to me throughout the course of the season.  He always seemed to make the smart decision even if it was an aggressive one.    While in the heat of the moment, both my wife and I were questioning why not Berry at that point...but afterwards it made sense to me.
 
I do still highly disagree with anyone who argues that Farrell shouldn't have had someone throwing sooner in the 6th.   Not having someone up and throwing at the start of the inning?  Ok.  By the time Fielder's double hit the wall though there should have been someone warming.  And no way should he have faced Avila. 
 

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,753
Twin Cities
I agree with the last tow posts.  You can disagree with Farrell's choice not to PR with Berry, but sticking with Gomes was defensible.  Good baserunner, already in scoring position, no outs.  If he advanced to third with one out, Farrell could still PR Berry to improve the odds of a fast runner scoring on a sac fly.  Never got to that point.
 
As for Buchholz, I was annoyed with the entire slowness of the team.  When the pen finally got up, they spent 5 minutes stretching.  I'm not sure that's on Farrell - maybe it is - but it seems to me that in the playoffs, your middle relievers ought to be staying loose and at least be ready to get up and start throwing immediately in EVERY inning.   That way one trip to the mound by the pitching coach gives you enough time to throw 15-20 warm-ups and come in. 
 
It doesn't matter how Buch had been pitching.  Things can fall apart quickly.  By the 6th inning of a 0-0 game, when you're getting no hit again, you have to keep things close and be ready to make a move quickly.  Relievers should have been throwing after Fielder's hit.  The Sox weren't, and ultimately, that's on Farrell for not having the pen prepared.
 

Mighty Joe Young

The North remembers
SoSH Member
Sep 14, 2002
8,401
Halifax, Nova Scotia , Canada
KillerBs said:
...ground ball towards the SS hole, short WP, fly ball to medium CF, foul pop up to the stands at 1b, I am sure there are more.
 
You also force the Tigers to defend against the steal of 3b, which effects infield defense.
 
I am not saying the difference is great. But if there is an increase in odds in scoring with Berry at 2b over Gomes (1-2-5%?). I think the move has to be made there, given that that increase in odds = an increase in winning the game, and the downside risk to not making the move is non-existent.
Of course there's a downside risk of not making a move .. Not sure if thats English .. I think what you are saying is that there is nothing to lose by bringing Berry in to run. You lose Gomes' bat and Berry' legs if the game goes into extras. And going from 2nd to 3rd on an infield groundout is as much about base running skill as raw speed. Just because some guy is fast and is good at stealing 2nd doesn't make him a good base runner.

Look at it this way .. If Farrell HAd made the move there would be lots of people bitching over the knee jerk move. He'll .. People complain when someone like Papi - a thee toed sloth - is run for - and for good reason.

If they had been behind by a run then I think Berry would have been in there .. But not when it's tied and Gomes already at 2nd
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
I think Nava in LF the rest of the game is at least a wash, or maybe an upgrade (no tough lefties left for Detroit). So this isn't a an Ortiz PR situation where you have to weigh the possibility of not having Gomes later in the game. Losing Berry for a later PR situation at 1B I guess could be a small factor, but I don't think waiting for that hypothetical later in the game should be given a ton of weight over maximizing the current chances.
 
So to me its mostly a comparison of Gomes' base running savvy vs. Berry's extra speed.  Despite the attempts to claim that with 0 outs, there aren't many ways the extra speed helps, this is just not true.  The critical sac fly from 3B (or from 2nd to 3rd before the wild pitch) might happen with 0 outs.  The critical single when the extra speed makes it an "automatic send" vs. "too close to call" could have happened with 0 outs.  Other possibilities exist as well. You just don't know. Gomes may be faster than he looks, but Berry is significantly faster.
 
Quantifying Gomes baserunning intuition is more difficult, but I agree it may be a real factor (though if he was actually tagging to 3rd on the infield foul popup to Fielder I think he would have been out by 20 feet). With the pressure of the situation, and the Fenway quirks, there are some situations Gomes is probably better than Berry if he really is a better decision maker.  For me, the speed difference wins out, but if you want to weigh the savvy base running more than I would, I suppose thats reasonable.
 
Starting Gomes vs. Scherzer in the first place was more questionable than the lack of a PR to me. Also disagreed with slow response to Clay loosing it. Not simply the lack of a hook, but the lack of a response to the situation. No one warming, no visit to the mound by Nieves to buy time, just letting it spiral out of control before giving yourself options. 
 

KillerBs

New Member
Nov 16, 2006
906
Certainly, if you do not accept that Berry increases the odds of scoring the run, i.e he is a better baserunner than Gomes, then that changes the calculation considerably. As Berry is a much faster runner than Gomes, and by no accounts incompetent in using his speed on the bases, I find this hard to accept, but whatever, certainly Farrell knows a lot more about the relative base running abilities of these two than I do. 
 
As to the downside risk to making the move (which is what I intended to refer to above, but erroneously did not), I would just be repeating myself and teddykgb has already captured my thoughts on this. 
 
To the more important point, I hope Farrell is not caught again without Tazawa and Morales ready to go in a jiffy, 3rd time thru the order in a close game. 
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
The biggest factor in not using Berry is the fact that there were no outs.  With no outs, you want your runner(s) moving station to station unless there's no doubt at all that they can take an extra base.  Regardless of who is running at second, Butterfield is going to hold him at third on a hit unless there's a 100% chance he can score.
 
The hitter's task at this point is at the very least to move the runner to third.  If he fails to do that and makes an out, THEN you reconsider the runner at second and perhaps bring in Berry.  With one out, you're likely going to be more aggressive in sending the runner home on a single, and a little extra speed can make a big difference.  But until there's an out recorded, you absolutely stick with Gomes.  Fortunately, Gomes got to third without the benefit of a hit or an out and was in position to score easily on any ball that got through the infield or a reasonably deep fly ball.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
Red(s)HawksFan said:
The biggest factor in not using Berry is the fact that there were no outs.  With no outs, you want your runner(s) moving station to station unless there's no doubt at all that they can take an extra base.  Regardless of who is running at second, Butterfield is going to hold him at third on a hit unless there's a 100% chance he can score.
 
 
With zero outs, you don't want the runner moving station to station, you want the runner taking no risks.  What is risky for Gomes may not be risky for Berry. 
 
Being forced to hold at 3rd because you don't want to risk an out at the plate still may not lead to a good outcome in the end.  In case people haven't noticed, his team has a penchant for not putting the ball in play recently. A runner at 3rd and 0 or 1 out is a nice spot to be in, but by no means is close to an automatic run.
 

selahsean

New Member
Dec 22, 2005
202
Red(s)HawksFan said:
I'm not seeing the slow hook issue with Buchholz, and I couldn't believe how much Buck and McCarver were harping on it.  Buchholz was cruising up to Cabrera's AB (no hits since the second, only an HBP and an E6 put any runners on).  Cabrera's HR was on a 1-0, followed by Fielder's double on the first pitch, then Martinez was 1-2 when he hit the double.  There was no reason to have someone warming to start the inning, which is arguably what would have needed to happen to have a pitcher ready by the time Martinez reached.
 
I guess an argument could be made that Farrell shouldn't have allowed Buchholz to pitch to Avila, but if they were truly afraid of Avila, the guy they would have had up would have been Doubront or Morales rather than Workman (i.e. a lefty).  But overall, I think that inning is entirely on Buchholz just losing his edge rather than Farrell not acting/reacting fast enough.
 
Someone already probably said it, but Clay doesn't seem like he's good for a 100 pitch outing yet.  He looked gassed quickly.  I think he was around 70 or so pitches to start the inning.  I was a little surprised they didn't send Nieves out there (while getting someone up) after the Cabrera shot.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
selahsean said:
 
Someone already probably said it, but Clay doesn't seem like he's good for a 100 pitch outing yet.  He looked gassed quickly.  I think he was around 70 or so pitches to start the inning.  I was a little surprised they didn't send Nieves out there (while getting someone up) after the Cabrera shot.
 
62 pitches to start the inning, then got the first hitter to fly out on 5 pitches (which was the fifth straight out he'd gotten following the E6).  He hung the pitch that Cabrera hit out, but as someone already pointed out, it was out of the zone and Cabrera just went up and got it.  Also, it was a Fenway HR...a long fly ball that was likely an out in any other ball park.  And even with that, down 2-0 with the bases empty and one out isn't necessarily panic time with one of your best pitchers on the mound, even with his stamina woes since he's returned.  He has gone over 100 pitches in his last three starts...expecting him to get through 80-90 pitches effectively shouldn't be out of the question by now.
 
After Fielder hit the next pitch for the double, maybe then is the time to get someone up and warming, combined with a visit from Nieves.  After Martinez doubles, guys should be throwing in earnest.  But even with all that, Buchholz is still in there to pitch to Peralta, whom he retired.  Getting Peralta may have bought him one more hitter to get himself out of the jam only down 3-0.
 

absintheofmalaise

too many flowers
Dope
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2005
23,334
The gran facenda
selahsean said:
 
Someone already probably said it, but Clay doesn't seem like he's good for a 100 pitch outing yet.  He looked gassed quickly.  I think he was around 70 or so pitches to start the inning.  I was a little surprised they didn't send Nieves out there (while getting someone up) after the Cabrera shot.
Actually, the person you quoted in your post mentioned that in his last three outings that Buchholz had exceeded 100 pitches. You can also look at his game logs to check the pitch totals. 
10/7 @ TB 6 innings 104 pitches
9/27 @ Balt 6 innings 113 pitches
9/21 vs. Tor 6 innings 106 pitches
9/15 vs NY 6 innings 91 pitches
 
This information is pretty easy to find.
 
I agree that Nieves should have been sent out to talk to him. 
 

ookami7m

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,657
Mobile, AL
kazuneko said:
Yes. Everything was being hit hard against him and Farrell was very slow in responding....
Not entirely sure what he was thinking but very glad Papi made the whole conversation moot..
 
I don't get the slow hook argument. It wouldn't have mattered if Buch went all out there, at the time the Sox bats hadn't done anything. Without offense, the pitching can only do so much. I wasn't scared of Avila in that spot, but sometimes the outcome comes out wrong.  
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,278
AZ
A few more downsides of Berry -- Nava is a worse fielder than Gomes.  Nava hits RHP better than Gomes to the tune over .100 OPS points, and the Tigers bullpen had RHP left.  If Nava is in and Gomes out, Coke or Alvarez can come in to turn him around.  If he's on the bench, you have him to PH for Gomes against a righty or to burn a righty.  
 
I think Berry's highest and best use is when the team is down by a run late, and that was still a possibility in that game.  I agree that saving a PH for later in a game is a bit like saving a closer, but it's a bit different at home.  The Sox, at that point in the game, could not lose it without at least six more outs -- meaning at least five batters after Salty.  It's not exactly like the occasion when you fail to use your closer and never get a chance to use him again.  If the Sox don't get Gomes home, there are still a large set of circumstances in which Berry is still quite useful.  Let's say Iggy comes up with that ball and guns Gomes down at the plate or at third?  Now it's one out and Salty at first.  
 
It seems all agree that the delta between Gomes and Berry is low in terms of speed, and tempered by Gomes' experience.  The only scenarios that matter in deciding downside risk all involve extra innings, or a scenario in which Gomes is put out.  In all of those scenarios -- or at least the ones I can envision -- having Nava and Berry still on the bench seems to outweigh that delta to me. 
 
(Edited to clarify the LHP/RHP point.)
 

jaimecohenl

New Member
Feb 5, 2007
65
mexico city
If berry pinch ran for Gomes, he would probably be replaced by a PH in his next at bat (Nava), im guessing Farrel was saving Nava to PH for WMB if he came to bat with a runner on 3rd and less than 2 outs, therefore the advantage of running for Gomes was lost if you cant PH for WMB
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,278
AZ
jaimecohenl said:
If berry pinch ran for Gomes, he would probably be replaced by a PH in his next at bat (Nava), im guessing Farrel was saving Nava to PH for WMB if he came to bat with a runner on 3rd and less than 2 outs, therefore the advantage of running for Gomes was lost if you cant PH for WMB
 
If Nava hits for WMB, then Xander has to come in if you don't score and you have two left fielders in the game.  So, I guess at that point, you pull Gomes, give Xander his spot?  Then your entire bench is burned except Ross.  Tough move, I think.
 
If Berry had run for Gomes, Nava would have been in the game at the end of the half inning, not as PH later, because someone has to play left field.  (Unless you're going to let Berry play it.)
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
jaimecohenl said:
If berry pinch ran for Gomes, he would probably be replaced by a PH in his next at bat (Nava), im guessing Farrel was saving Nava to PH for WMB if he came to bat with a runner on 3rd and less than 2 outs, therefore the advantage of running for Gomes was lost if you cant PH for WMB
 
If you PR Berry, I assume the play is to still PH for WMB with Nava if it gets to that point.  You don't need to wait until Berry's spot comes up again to use Nava.
 
Nava then stays in to take Berry's spot in left. Xander then replaces WMB at 3rd. 
 

jaimecohenl

New Member
Feb 5, 2007
65
mexico city
radsoxfan said:
 
If you PR Berry, I assume the play is to still PH for WMB with Nava if it gets to that point.  You don't need to wait until Berry's spot comes up again to use Nava.
 
Nava then stays in to take Berry's spot in left. Xander then replaces WMB at 3rd. 
 
 
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
 
If Nava hits for WMB, then Xander has to come in if you don't score and you have two left fielders in the game.  So, I guess at that point, you pull Gomes, give Xander his spot?  Then your entire bench is burned except Ross.  Tough move, I think.
 
If Berry had run for Gomes, Nava would have been in the game at the end of the half inning, not as PH later, because someone has to play left field.  (Unless you're going to let Berry play it.)
 
[SIZE=10pt]Yeah you’re right missed that one, then the only disadvantage caused by PR Berry would be a depleted bench and a downgrade at 3b defensively, that being the case Farrel should have pinch ran. [/SIZE]
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,240
Minneapolis Millers said:
Relievers should have been throwing after Fielder's hit.  The Sox weren't, and ultimately, that's on Farrell for not having the pen prepared.
That's ridiculous. Cabrera's HR was on a pitch that only Cabrera could hit an HR on. And it was after Buchholz got one out in a game where he was pitching pretty well.
 
Avila's hit came 9 pitches later. 3 of which involved an out.
 
This thread is *this* close to being overrun with "OHMYGAWD its the first inning and he gave up  hit...get all 9 guys up in the pen NOW...OR FIRE THE MANAGER!!!!!!!!"
 
[SIZE=10pt]Yeah you’re right missed that one, then the only disadvantage caused by PR Berry would be a depleted bench and a downgrade at 3b defensively, that being the case Farrel should have pinch ran.[/SIZE]
 
 
The other disadvantage is that you lose the opportunity to use Berry in a more advantageous situation, like iof Nava -- widely regarded as the worst baserunner any of us has ever seen -- was successful as a PH.  Farrell did say somewhere that he was saving Nava to PH for Middlebrooks.
 

alannathan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 10, 2007
216
Champaign, IL
Red(s)HawksFan said:
The biggest factor in not using Berry is the fact that there were no outs.  With no outs, you want your runner(s) moving station to station unless there's no doubt at all that they can take an extra base.  Regardless of who is running at second, Butterfield is going to hold him at third on a hit unless there's a 100% chance he can score.
 
The hitter's task at this point is at the very least to move the runner to third.  If he fails to do that and makes an out, THEN you reconsider the runner at second and perhaps bring in Berry.  With one out, you're likely going to be more aggressive in sending the runner home on a single, and a little extra speed can make a big difference.  But until there's an out recorded, you absolutely stick with Gomes.  Fortunately, Gomes got to third without the benefit of a hit or an out and was in position to score easily on any ball that got through the infield or a reasonably deep fly ball.
While I have been among those who advocated Berry as PR for Gomes, I find RHF's argument compelling.  However, I am not willing to let Farrell off the hook for not having warmup action more quickly in the 6th.  At least it allows you to keep your options open about pulling Buch as the inning unfolded.
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
8,681
It's worth noting that, at the same point in the 2004 postseason, Terry Francona had just finishing his fifth year as a big league manager, served as a major league coach in three other seasons (one as a third-base coach and two as bench coach) and had five seasons as a minor league manager on his resume.  His in-game experience was far deeper that Farrell's is right now.
 

dwainw

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
2,403
Minneapolis, MN
In this whole Gomes v. Berry baserunning debate, why is everyone completely overlooking the possible collision-at-the-plate scenario? 

Point Gomes.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
dwainw said:
In this whole Gomes v. Berry baserunning debate, why is everyone completely overlooking the possible collision-at-the-plate scenario? 

Point Gomes.
 
True, but if the play is going to be close enough to necessitate a collision, the runner should be held at third regardless of who's running.  At least if we're still talking about there being no outs.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
 
If Nava hits for WMB, then Xander has to come in if you don't score and you have two left fielders in the game.  So, I guess at that point, you pull Gomes, give Xander his spot?  Then your entire bench is burned except Ross.  Tough move, I think.
 
If Berry had run for Gomes, Nava would have been in the game at the end of the half inning, not as PH later, because someone has to play left field.  (Unless you're going to let Berry play it.)
 
And now we know why Saltalamacchia has been taking grounders at 3B before games!
 

Rudy's Curve

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2006
2,333
Per Speier's Twitter, Farrell is again considering starting Gomes tomorrow. Are these supposed intangibles really worth the .150-point difference of OPS vs. RHP between him and Nava? If the Tigers did this, we'd laugh at them.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
Rudy's Curve said:
Per Speier's Twitter, Farrell is again considering starting Gomes tomorrow. Are these supposed intangibles really worth the .150-point difference of OPS vs. RHP between him and Nava? If the Tigers did this, we'd laugh at them.
 
Not to mention Gomes is 0 for his career (3 walks, 0 hits in 13 PA) against Verlander.  Nava's only got one game's worth of at bats against him himself, going 1 for 3 with a walk, the one hit being a bases loaded double in a game last year.
 

Rudy's Curve

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2006
2,333
This team has been successful all year with a Nava/Gomes platoon. Nava even has a .455 OBP in the playoffs. What on Earth has he done to lose his job? Did Ortiz hit a GS because Gomes' intangibles were in the lineup? 
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
KillerBs said:
Surely Cherington and the big brains upstairs won't allow for this?
 
They allowed Gomes to face Scherzer (and his .494 OPS vs. right handed hitters). I think the case for Nava was even stronger for Game 2 than Game 3. Still, I fully support Nava against Verlander, and think it's odd if he doesn't get the start again.  The guy put up an elite .322/.411/.484/.894 lines against righties this year.  Maybe there are some numbers out there that Nava is simply incapable of catching up to a 95+ mph fastball, so he's rendered useless against these Detroit starters?  I doubt it though. 
 
I'm curious what the internal evaluation of Gomes' vs. Nava is on D though.  Gomes replaced Nava a few times as a defensive replacement earlier in the year if I remember correctly.  Maybe in the spacious Comerica park, they prefer Gomes out in LF.
 

rembrat

Member
SoSH Member
May 26, 2006
36,345
Why are you guys losing your collective shit over Daniel Nava potentially starting a game on the bench? Jesus Christ, people.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
rembrat said:
Why are you guys losing your collective shit over Daniel Nava potentially starting a game on the bench? Jesus Christ, people.
 
God forbid we rationally discuss a managerial decision in the "Let's talk about the manager" thread.
 
If you would like to participate, feel free to share your story about why Nava should be on the bench against back-to-back tough righties.
 

Dahabenzapple2

Mr. McGuire / Axl's Counter
SoSH Member
Jun 20, 2011
8,926
Wayne, NJ
Nava needs to play tomorrow

If Gomes had a even a trace of a good track record against Verlander then maybe but he is 0-13 if I read that correctly.

I also think Napoli is the right choice
 

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
20,404
Going back to the end of the regular season, Napoli is 7 for his last 41 with 16 Ks and Verlander is no slumpbuster.  I really think there's a chance that we see Gomes in LF and Nava at 1B in this game in which they may have to scratch and claw to get runs.
 

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
20,404
Also, FWIW, the Sox faced Verlander once this year (June 23rd) and Gomes got the start in LF over Nava and went 1-for-5 with a K.
 

KillerBs

New Member
Nov 16, 2006
906
Jonny Gomes: Our own Captain Intangibles. But I always thought that Nava had some pretty solid intangibles too. I guess not.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
Ferm Sheller said:
Also, FWIW, the Sox faced Verlander once this year (June 23rd) and Gomes got the start in LF over Nava and went 1-for-5 with a K.
 
Gomes was 0 for 3 against Verlander, 0 for 1 against Smyly, and 1 for 1 (double, RBI) against Benoit.  And the Sox lost 7-5.  That was the Bailey blows the lead in the 7th because he'd been demoted from the closer's role game.
 

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
20,404
Red(s)HawksFan said:
 
Gomes was 0 for 3 against Verlander, 0 for 1 against Smyly, and 1 for 1 (double, RBI) against Benoit.  And the Sox lost 7-5.  That was the Bailey blows the lead in the 7th because he'd been demoted from the closer's role game.
 
Ah, right. Of course.  Thanks.  So damn tired from last night and had to work today.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,240
radsoxfan said:
 
God forbid we rationally discuss a managerial decision in the "Let's talk about the manager" thread.
 
If you would like to participate, feel free to share your story about why Nava should be on the bench against back-to-back tough righties.
The problem is that a rational discussion needs two things: complete information (or more than we have, anyway); and an assumption that the manager knows what he's doing -- which some people here are unwilling to start with.  He gets the benefit of the doubt with me. Maybe that doesn't fit with "rational," but that's the best I can do.
 
Obviously, I would have to admit that there is a more-than-zero percent chance that he is wilfully sticking his head up his ass on this and other decisions, but unless you send pictures, I'll go with "he's probably got a reason, and if I was more than a fan who watches on a nice TV from my couch, I might be able to guess what it is."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.