Thought of another firing in season. In 2012, Bobby Valentine fired Bob McClure as pitching coaching in August. But McClure wasn't Valentine's pick in the first place, and brought in Niemann to do "special work" with the pitchers, so McClure was surely a marked man. Plus Valentine was insane, so his dismissal by Bobby V is more a badge of honor.bosockboy said:
Red Sox fire Juan Nieves
- Thread starter Corsi
- Start date
- Status
8slim said:
Conspiracy theory? Where are you getting that? I just find it stupid to assign blame for this to the guy. At some point, under-performing pitchers need to be held accountable. So, Nieves gets no "credit" for the 2013 staff ... but we're supposed to believe that he's a major part of the reason Clay Buchholz has pitched poorly?
They needed a scapegoat. They found one. It's easier to fire Nieves than to demote, trade or send to the bullpen a half-dozen or so struggling pitchers
I would think -- and sure as hell hope -- the front office is smarter than to make a purely reactionary move.
I'm sure they know it's not Nieves' fault that Masterson can't break a pane of glass with his fastball anymore, but you can have a marginal staff AND a pitching coach who isn't maximizing their potential.
Now the pressure is squarely on Ben. If his new pitching coach can't get better results than everyone will know Ben didn't do his job in procuring pitching.
I'm sure they know it's not Nieves' fault that Masterson can't break a pane of glass with his fastball anymore, but you can have a marginal staff AND a pitching coach who isn't maximizing their potential.
Now the pressure is squarely on Ben. If his new pitching coach can't get better results than everyone will know Ben didn't do his job in procuring pitching.
Red Sox minor league pitching coordinator Ralph Treuel,soxhop411 said:
Richard Daniel Sauveur is currently the pitching coach of Aguilas Cibaeñas in the Dominican Republic Professional Baseball League
Bob Kipper- AAA pitching coach
8slim said:
Yeah, I sort of see this like the Francona dismissal. I think generally (Globe hit-piece aside) most people thought Francona was a good manager and it's hard to point at one person to blame 2011 on, but sometimes it can be good to switch things up if the team is playing poorly. I'm sure Nieves will get another good job somewhere else and be just fine, and the Red Sox will get another pitching coach and and as long as they don't hire a Bobby Valentine (shudder) pitching coach replacement, the new guy will probably look great as the pitchers' results maybe get more in line with their peripherals. Or they'll continue to be lousy.
I do think the FO was getting really frustrated with this season and this is about as much as they could do at this point - to which I'm sympathetic. Even though it surprised me, I think this is probably about the right amount of thing to do. This team was projected to be doing a lot better, and fair or not, the responsibility for underperformance (and often credit for overperformance) falls on the coaching staff. Firing a pitching coach is a bullet the FO gets to use basically once per season, and you may as well shoot it before the season gets totally away from you and there's still something worth salvaging.
Ken Rosenthal @Ken_Rosenthal 3m3 minutes ago
Willis was #Indians’ pitching coach from 2003 to ’09. #RedSox manager John Farrell was #Indians’ farm director from Nov. ’01 through ’06.
Willis was #Indians’ pitching coach from 2003 to ’09. #RedSox manager John Farrell was #Indians’ farm director from Nov. ’01 through ’06.
WenZink said:
At least this time no one on Yawkey Way is whispering about Nieves having a drinking problem.
No one is saying he doesn't get credit for what he's done or that he's the cause of the problem though. A move like this just means they want to try something else.E5 Yaz said:
soxhop411 said:
As I alluded to earlier, the firing of Nieves may be nothing more than a prelude to Barnes and E Rodriguez coming to the majors and wanting Bob Kipper to come with them. Kipper worked with both at Portland and Pawtucket, and he may have an excellent relationship with those two. Even if Nieves was not "part of the problem," he certainly was not part of the solution.
Ken Rosenthal @Ken_Rosenthal 50s51 seconds ago
Willis also was #Mariners’ pitching coach from Aug. 2010 to ’13. Had three Cy Youngs under his watch - CC in ’07, CLee in ’08, Felix in ’10.
Willis also was #Mariners’ pitching coach from Aug. 2010 to ’13. Had three Cy Youngs under his watch - CC in ’07, CLee in ’08, Felix in ’10.
E5 Yaz said:
It seems that some are suggesting this decision was not reached from a sincere place. That the Sox *know* Nieves is not to blame, but they're doing so anyway.
As others have said these things aren't binary. There can be larger issues at play AND getting rid of Nieves is a legitimate decision to be made.
E5 Yaz said:
Smarter, too. What makes more sense?
a) Contrary to what their previous track records and their current peripherals indicate, the Red Sox pitching staff really is this bad.
b) Something is preventing the pitchers from achieving their true talent level.
If b) is a better guess, which I think it is, you don't even need to believe that Nieves is specifically at fault to warrant making a change. You simply need to believe that it's worth trying a different coaching approach. What worked so well for the pitchers we happened to have in 2013 might not work for the pitchers we happen to have in 2015 (and for those who were here in 2013, they may be facing different challenges now).
DLew On Roids said:
it's early yet.
It's funny, but my lasting memory of "Cumby" was his celebrating with a couple of players after the Sox won game 5 of the 1999 ALDS v Cleveland. He looked smashed and was doing some middle-aged, white guy interpretation of Salsa dancing. No whispering was required!
Scott Lauber @ScottLauber 18s18 seconds ago
Farrell on Nieves: "The ability to affect change when needed or adjustments required, that wasn't the same as we saw two years ago." #RedSox
Farrell on Nieves: "The ability to affect change when needed or adjustments required, that wasn't the same as we saw two years ago." #RedSox
E5 Yaz said:
If the next pitching coach doesn't make an impact, then you can safely assume the coaching isn't the issue, so you move on to making roster changes.
DLew On Roids said:
Well, Nieves hasn't called the morning shows sounding impaired yet either. But Cumby's biggest crime was killing still cursing bucky on his way out the door.
ehaz said:
That would be interesting, but I wonder if Pedro would really be the best full-time pitching coach, even though he's a fascinating commentator.
"Why don't you just throw one of your multiple devastating pitches with pinpoint control into the area you just naturally intuit that the hitter can't get it? Ok, my work here is done - I'll just be in my office being awesome."
EDIT: Obviously he could be a bit more helpful than that, but I don't get the sense that he wants to work super hard to be a full-time pitching coach.
Cumberland Blues said:
I remember that. I think "The A Team" was still together (Andelman/Arnold) and somehow I heard part of it. Cumby was hilarious, but it was awesome, because you rarely get those candid revelations from guys that are looking for a job. Amazingly, Cumby got a job with the Royals the next year. I guess the consensus in the baseball world was that working under Joe Kerrigan would drive anyone to drink.
Let's see, perhaps a replacement can be found among these high school coaches:
- Gregg Maddux: Bishop Gorman (Las Vegas) HS
- Andy Benes: Westminster Christian (St. Louis) HS
- Mike Timlin: Valor Christian (Highlands Ranch, CO) HS
- David Wells: Point Loma (San Diego) HS (his alma mater)
- Calvin Schiraldi: Saint Micahel's (Austin) HS
- Bill Swift Scottsdale (AZ) Christian Academy
- Troy Percival: Poly (Riverside, CA) HS
- Jim Barr: Granite Bay (Sacramento) HS
Kremlin Watcher said:
One could view blaming the pitching coach as their thinking the pitching DOESN'T have deeper problems.
As far as impatience, this decision appears to be coming right from JH given his comments about the big braintrust meeting a few days ago.
Rasputin said:
Of course they need better results. But, as I said, they can't trade or DFA or demote all those who are in part responsible, so they have to make a symbolic gesture that acknowledges the failure.
There's no way of knowing whether the staff would have improved if Nieves had stayed on. If they do improve now, it will be said it's in part because of Nieves being fired and/or the work of the new pitching coach.
If they don't improve, that creates a new narrative.
To me, this isn't about Nieves. As rembrat said, it's about the making the move at all
alwyn96 said:
This post made me laugh (in a good way), but to be honest, Pedro might actually have a decent tip or two. He wasn't just a baseball throwing magician, he's pretty damn smart, too.
For those who haven't seen it:
JimBoSox9 said:
From the MLB Network thread in the media forum.
The only reason why I don't see it being a possibility is because I can't see Pedro wanting the job and all the travelling and responsibility. Certainly not for a pitching coach's contract.
Plus the conversation would be more like "if they get close enough to the plate that they can get the bat on the ball, just drill 'em in the ass"
kartvelo said:
It took this joke popping up three times for me to realize that Nieves means snow in Spanish,
I'm trying to picture that. Does Taz speak English?soxhop411 said:
The "eye" test is being used around here a lot recently when people can't quantify something. First, Nieves never seemed to go out to the mound much when pitchers got into trouble. Neither did Curt Young when he was here for that matter. My eye test of the known good ones like Perranoski, Righetti, hell, Larry Rothschild of the Yankees is that they pick the right time to go out there and have a plan to share and a clear message to deliver when they do. Nieves, not so much. And Farrell saying what, just last week, that pitchers have to use both sides of the plate more. Well, duh! Nieves seemed like a good dude, but did he ever come out and get in a pitcher's face and say, like, "start throwing strikes, as___le, or you're out of here"?
If he did, then count me among the supporters of the canning. That reeks of inability on the coach's part to help a pitcher with in-game corrections.Al Zarilla said:
As others have said, I don't think it has to be seen as a "scapegoating" at all, although it sure is a fun narrative for the mediots to latch their tentacles to. Braintrust decides that the team is, for whatever (and likely multiple) reasons; they pick the weakest link on the team (pitching) and make the least intrusive change in that area, just for the sake of disrupting the homeostasis. I doubt any of them expect someone to come in and Dave Duncanize the staff, but at some point you have to do something to break a pattern or to try to induce a Westinghouse effect to get the staff going.
8slim said:
Yeah I'm baffled by this. Maybe he is a scapegoat--so what? They've been horrifically bad and sitting around and changing nothing is negligent.
Get a new set of eyes in there, a new approach. He's the pitching coach, this is the business. I don't think anyone's perception on who assembled the team and who is basically running it is changed by this.
soxhop411 said:
I forgot Treuel was still around. He's had this job before - he was the interim pitching coach after Joe Kerrigan was promoted to manager. I remember the players (including Pedro) saying glowing things about him, and I remember the pitching being pretty good during that ridiculous fade at the end of 2001 (unlike the offense). So there might be worse choices than him.
Sometimes you have to be brutally clear and not a nice guy, like when pitchers are obviously nibbling. Maybe Nieves was too nice a guy.P'tucket said:
JohntheBaptist said:
This is a fair point.
I'm irritated that they put together a bad pitching staff, and I'm beyond the end of my rope with Cherington's approach to team construction. But you're right that the old saw applies here -- they can't fire the players, so fire the coach/manager and see if that helps.
Edit: Apologies -- I just realized that several people previously posted essentially the same thing I did above. Sorry for the redundancy.
8slim said:
JohntheBaptist said:
It's really not that hard to understand. There's no attachment to Nieves per se. I'll just quote somebody else who put it better.
E5 Yaz said:
E5 Yaz said:
So it's your position that the pitching coach and the performance of the pitchers have so little to do with one another that they can be compared to totally unrelated appendages on the body?
In regards to the Tazawa-Nieves confrontation, I do specifically remember him coming off the mound a bit hotter than we've ever seen from him before. After getting the third out of the 7th, he was gesturing/verbally expressing frustration in the direction of home plate and looking exasperated, like "See?! That's what I wanted to do all along." It appeared he was upset with the pitch choices/locations Swihart was calling for - which you can assume were relayed from Nieves.
They had two brand new catchers, and now a third who is also a rookie, catching four brand new starters (if you still count Kelly as new) and a pretty haphazard bullpen arrangment. Every coach puts up with some degree of roster turnover, but Nieves was juggling a lot of moving parts. There's a very good chance that Nieves was doing a good job overall, but just had a blind (or fuzzy) spot where Farrell and the FO didn't want one (i.e. pitch sequencing with 2-down and RISP, etc).
They had two brand new catchers, and now a third who is also a rookie, catching four brand new starters (if you still count Kelly as new) and a pretty haphazard bullpen arrangment. Every coach puts up with some degree of roster turnover, but Nieves was juggling a lot of moving parts. There's a very good chance that Nieves was doing a good job overall, but just had a blind (or fuzzy) spot where Farrell and the FO didn't want one (i.e. pitch sequencing with 2-down and RISP, etc).
Snoop Soxy Dogg said:
Actually it is hard to understand. Really hard to understand. It's the pitching coach and the pitching was terrible. They felt they needed someone else. That's literally the entire story.
To E5's point--of course they're going to fire the pitching coach before they change the players. They've determined the time to act is now. They're trying something new. All this scapegoat stuff--they're not trying to pass it off on anyone, and if they are, who cares? That's their PR work to do. I mean, fingers and toes? Come on, he's the pitching coach, the pitching has been dreadful for over a year now.
What's seen as a bigger panic move - trading starters with a SSS still in play, or moving on from a year+ experience with a pitching coach?
I'm as down on the pitching as anybody (and have been since the offseason,) but there's still not a big enough sample to make dramatic positional moves in that department yet (unless moving Masterson to the pen and giving Johnson a shot qualifies as "dramatic.") Nieves has been around long enough for Farrell and the FO to have a respectable idea on what he offered, so either he fell on the sword for the random variance of underperformance, or it was simply a bad fit. Whichever it is, it's a defensible stance given the results.
I'm as down on the pitching as anybody (and have been since the offseason,) but there's still not a big enough sample to make dramatic positional moves in that department yet (unless moving Masterson to the pen and giving Johnson a shot qualifies as "dramatic.") Nieves has been around long enough for Farrell and the FO to have a respectable idea on what he offered, so either he fell on the sword for the random variance of underperformance, or it was simply a bad fit. Whichever it is, it's a defensible stance given the results.
I'm not sure why so many of you are throwing your hats on the ground and stomping on them in an emphasis that this was "bush league", "scapegoating", and "purely a symbolic gesture. You don't really have any way of knowing this is the case, and the level of vitriol is unreasonable without that knowledge.
The pitching staff is terrible, performing below any reasonable expectations going into the season. Even if the assembling of the team isn't Juan Nieves that doesn't mean he has no part to play in their failures. Why is it unreasonable to think that they are unhappy with the staff and unhappy with Nieves? It doesn't have to be one or the other.
I'm just not willing to declare this as pure scapegoating, isn't it just as possible that the poor pitching is an excuse to move on from Nieves that they wanted to do anyway?
The pitching staff is terrible, performing below any reasonable expectations going into the season. Even if the assembling of the team isn't Juan Nieves that doesn't mean he has no part to play in their failures. Why is it unreasonable to think that they are unhappy with the staff and unhappy with Nieves? It doesn't have to be one or the other.
I'm just not willing to declare this as pure scapegoating, isn't it just as possible that the poor pitching is an excuse to move on from Nieves that they wanted to do anyway?
Part of Nieves' problem could be that he had so many problems he had to work on that he just didn't have the time to devote to them all, hence Farrell having to step in and get involved more. When you have only 2 or 3 guys going badly at once, you should be able to devote a lot of time to each guy. When it's 8 or 9 guys going badly, well, you do the math,
I don't know that I'd say scapegoating - I see where they'd fire him, and I don't have any major issues with that, honestly. Mind you, there is some scapegoating; reading the tweets, Farrell and Ben are saying Nieves wasn't getting through to the guys, that's why they're underperforming, but they have to explain the move. The pitching is terrible, you fire the pitching coach. Fine. Whatever.
I'm in the camp of "this pitching staff is terrible anyway", but what are you gonna do? Can't fire them all. I'm just not sure what exactly this is going to resolve, unless the new pitching coach brings a 95-fastball in his bags for Masterson, or whatever for Buck's psyche. Ultimately, you have some you get some of those guys off the rotation and replace them with better talent if you want better results.
I'm in the camp of "this pitching staff is terrible anyway", but what are you gonna do? Can't fire them all. I'm just not sure what exactly this is going to resolve, unless the new pitching coach brings a 95-fastball in his bags for Masterson, or whatever for Buck's psyche. Ultimately, you have some you get some of those guys off the rotation and replace them with better talent if you want better results.
This is a great point. Ask any business leader, teacher, etc, and they will say you really benefit from having a few high performers that you can count on as you put out fires and deal with developing up and comers or fixing the low performers. If you're the pitching coach of this Red Sox team, where do you start!?DanoooME said:
DanoooME said:
Good observation. Nieves may have felt like the guy in the old vaudeville act trying to keep 7 plates spinning on 7 different spindles, with eventually all 7 plates crashing onto the floor. Certainly a different staff than 2013, where you had a rotation with veteran starters in Lester, Lackey, Dempster and, later Peavy, who, for better or worse, probably were aware of their flaws and remedies. Nieves' culpability may be that instead of focusing on one plate at a time, he allowed himself to get completely scattered and ended up not helping any of them.
Edit: or what twib just said, although without the vaudeville analogy.
I think the crux of it is that the team isn't saying "Whew, OK, there we fixed it--it was Juan, you guys." They're saying "we need to start figuring this out, and a new set of eyes at the top of the coaching pyramid is our attempt to get that moving."
- Status