Farell getting killed as people have to blame someone, it's human nature. They only move I hated was not PH nap for salty with the go ahead run on 3B. Salty just can not hit a 99 MPH fastball..
ricopetro6 said:count was 3-1..
smastroyin said:It's also worth noting that WMB's positioning on the Holliday 2B is probably something Farrell has to answer for as well.
Paul M said:Have to think Morales as frightening as the prospect is, might need to be an early option given St. Louis' relative performance vs. LH. Doubront could go another 25-30 pitches I guess, but how many times has he had to come back after throwing 25 pitches like tonight? And what can you expect from Workman again since he threw 30 pitches. Just hoping Buchholz can summon the strength a la Pedro in 1999 to give them 6 strong innings. A 4 or 5 inning outing two nights in a row would be very difficult to manage especially with the pitcher having to bat.
amarshal2 said:I thought this board was insane through the TB and DET series for giving Farrell a pass on some absolutely inexcusably bad managing. Honestly, it's the worst managing I've seen on the Sox in the past ~13 years -- so including Grady. Tonight's bad decisions were some of his least offensive of the post season...at least now the eyes are open. The guy is a savant in the locker room but he's brain dead in-game and brain dead making up a line-up card. I'm not sure I can say the good outweighs the bad. He's not going anywhere so hopefully he'll learn.
amarshal2 said:I thought this board was insane through the TB and DET series for giving Farrell a pass on some absolutely inexcusably bad managing. Honestly, it's the worst managing I've seen on the Sox in the past ~13 years -- so including Grady. Tonight's bad decisions were some of his least offensive of the post season...at least now the eyes are open. The guy is a savant in the locker room but he's brain dead in-game and brain dead making up a line-up card. I'm not sure I can say the good outweighs the bad. He's not going anywhere so hopefully he'll learn.
Ed Hillel said:
When it comes to in-game managing, I've seen enough to think he's in over his head.
smastroyin said:Taking him out, on the other hand, is the move of a guy who is trying to prove he can hang in the NL.
If either Salty or WMB had done something, I would be fine. But your bullpen can't handle this load over and over, it's more important to keep the guy in who is getting outs than to get a guy riding a 1-15 slump to pinch hit with none on and two out.
I'm really unhappy with that top of the 7th from Farrell.
Reverend said:I honestly can't even ken what an appropriate response to this would look like.
2010: 89 wins, 73 losses.JimD said:I'd love to know what John Henry is thinking right now about Farrell's performance. He cannot be happy with what he is seeing.
I'm not suggesting that Farrell is about to get fired, but I think that the ownership group will certainly expect Cherington and Farrell to address the glaring weakness of his in-game management skills. I wouldn't be disappointed if the Cubs or Tigers hired Lovullo as manager and gave the Sox an opportunity to bring in a more seasoned bench coach for Farrell.barbed wire Bob said:2010: 89 wins, 73 losses.
2011: 90 wins, 72 losses.
2012: 69 wins, 93 losses.
2013: 97 wins, 65 losses.
I'm pretty sure Farrell's job is safe regardless of what happens in this series.
barbed wire Bob said:2010: 89 wins, 73 losses.
2011: 90 wins, 72 losses.
2012: 69 wins, 93 losses.
2013: 97 wins, 65 losses.
I'm pretty sure Farrell's job is safe regardless of what happens in this series.
Harry Hooper said:C'mon, after the "BobbyV Experience" no Sox manager who gets the players to perform and work together is getting fired. I hated just about every decision he made last night, but Farrell would have to pile up about 5 postseasons' worth of blunders to be in jeopardy.
This has been the case with JF's questionable moves throughout the playoffs but at a certain point you need to realize that a lot of bad moves add up even if there was some defensible thinking* behind each one. Plus, he admitted that he should have double-switched for Workman. So what was his reasonable thought process there?Rudy Pemberton said:I didn't agree with a lot of Farrell's moves last night; but there was a reasonable thought process behind each one.
But he threw last night, so he's not going to go again except in an emergency. He's not a rubber-armed reliever, he's a converted starter. Once you burn Doubie you may as well get 3-4 innings from him. Dempster is the first line of defense tonight.Gunfighter 09 said:They want Doubront for 3-4 innings today when Clay walks off in the 2nd or 3rd clutching his shoulder.
I know you have to win one game at a time, but I do wonder if removing Doubront was so he'd be available again today.bosockboy said:Yeah everyone is acting like Napoli would have automatically homered off Rosenthal. It was a weird move but I understand the rationale of trying to buy multiple outs from Workman by giving up one there. The one I can't get past is removing Doubie. He could've literally pitched until Koji.
Gunfighter 09 said:They want Doubront for 3-4 innings today when Clay walks off in the 2nd or 3rd clutching his shoulder.
The 3B coach for the Cardinals?soxhop411 said:Isn't the 3B coach also responsible for in game defensive moves along with JF?
coremiller said:Here's the problem with defending the Workman AB by saying they were trying to steal an IP in the bottom of the 9th: Farrell pulled Workman after two batters: a K and bloop single. Pulling him then was the right move, since you want your best guy in for that situation. But IF you're going to pull Workman at the first sign of trouble (which you should), you gain almost nothing by letting him hit.
I also don't understand saying "Napoli couldn't have hit a 99 mph fastball either." He's an above-average major league hitter, every hitter of his ability can hit a 100 mph fastball. He certainly would have had a meaningfully better chance than Workman, and if Napoli could get on the top of the order was coming up.
Caveat: I do not agree with the decision and did not last night.coremiller said:Here's the problem with defending the Workman AB by saying they were trying to steal an IP in the bottom of the 9th: Farrell pulled Workman after two batters: a K and bloop single. Pulling him then was the right move, since you want your best guy in for that situation. But IF you're going to pull Workman at the first sign of trouble (which you should), you gain almost nothing by letting him hit.
czar said:Caveat: I do not agree with the decision and did not last night.
That said, if Farrell is going to make the (IMO, incorrect) decision to stick with Workman to try and get another inning out of him (pushing Uehara back to the 10th), and then after two batters goes "oh crap, that was dumb," I'd rather have him admit the mistake and make the move. The Workman AB was the textbook definition of a "sunk cost" at that point.
It's worse (again, IMO) to call Farrell stupid for using Uehara in light of his decision in the 8th. If you are going to call him stupid, just say he screwed up letting Workman hit. But it's unfair to say "well, if Workman hits, at least stick with your guy in the 9th."
It's the opposite of when Francona would try and steal outs and stubbornly stick with his guys for three-four batters too long because he had made up his mind by the 6th that he was getting Wakefield through the 6th.
coremiller said:
I agree with your sunk cost point, but that's why you don't let Workman hit. The only reason to let Workman hit is to try to steal outs in the bottom half. But you know that as soon as a runner gets on you're going to bring in Koji, so there's no reason to let Workman hit.
Doubie only threw 25 pitches last night. You have to hope Lester can go into the 7th or 8th on Monday, so you may not need him in that game. Day off Tuesday. I would think, with no more series after this one, Doubie is available, available, available tonight. Did Farrell say anything about pitchers' availability?Toe Nash said:But he threw last night, so he's not going to go again except in an emergency. He's not a rubber-armed reliever, he's a converted starter. Once you burn Doubie you may as well get 3-4 innings from him. Dempster is the first line of defense tonight.
Giving away an out that late in a tie game is just stupid. The Sox were only guaranteed to have five more outs. Farrell gave away one.lexrageorge said:You let Workman hit because the chances of anything happening at that point (none on and 1 out against Rosenthal) are miniscule. You can't use the standard run expectancy tables when you're facing a guy like Rosenthal throwing 99-100 mph rising fastballs; if the Sox were down a run, you go with Napoli and hope for the best.
EvilEmpire said:Giving away an out that late in a tie game is just stupid. The Sox were only guaranteed to have five more outs. Farrell gave away one.
There is no way that a few more pitches from Workman are worth more than an out at that point in the game.
lexrageorge said:
Missing the double switch is probably one of those "oh crap" moments that once it happened led to all sorts of issues, including Workman hitting in the 9th.
czar said:I strongly dislike Breslow continuing to be used as a high-leverage RP. His playoff xFIP is now 5.43 and he's put on nearly a quarter of the batters he's faced with a BB or HBP. IMO, he has to move to like the 4th option (at best) in this pen right now. If you ignore his TB game and look at his peripherals, you may wonder why he's even something other than a mopup man on this roster. I'd rather see Dempster and maybe even (gulp) Morales over him to start an inning (in addition to Workman, Tazawa, Uehara, and Doubront). This is also highlighting how badly the Sox miss Andrew Miller.