What could possibly justify pitching to Nelson Cruz with first base open and the winning run on second base in the bottom of the 9th?
Second guessing the manager--2015
- Thread starter Plympton91
- Start date
Well .. Farrell himself says it was a dumb decision.
The 1-8 thing was obviously only part of the decision making process. But this is something that has bothered me ever since I first read about Earl Weaver keeping match up stats on punch cards. Obviously John Farrell is a bright guy. But he has to realize that , unless the 1-8 was seven strikeouts and a twenty foot swinging bunt and they all happened this year - it meant absolutely nothing. So why do the stats guys put meaningless crap in the scouting reports? Wouldn't it be better to write in "No matchup information available" ? All it does is put the onus on the Manager to understand the reliability of the numbers - which he probably does in a vacuum but in game defining moment doesn't completely dismiss the stat.
The 1-8 thing was obviously only part of the decision making process. But this is something that has bothered me ever since I first read about Earl Weaver keeping match up stats on punch cards. Obviously John Farrell is a bright guy. But he has to realize that , unless the 1-8 was seven strikeouts and a twenty foot swinging bunt and they all happened this year - it meant absolutely nothing. So why do the stats guys put meaningless crap in the scouting reports? Wouldn't it be better to write in "No matchup information available" ? All it does is put the onus on the Manager to understand the reliability of the numbers - which he probably does in a vacuum but in game defining moment doesn't completely dismiss the stat.
Lose, next time you leave after the 8th take Farrell with you, please!
edit...I have to wonder if anyone questioned him (during the game) about his decision.
edit...I have to wonder if anyone questioned him (during the game) about his decision.
Yeah really .. Isn't that what the Bench Coach AKA Consiglieri is for ? "Gee skip, Cruz has gone all Roy Hobbs on the league this year. We have a base open and a favourable matchup on the next guy. Maybe we should walk him?"75cent bleacher seat said:
To be fair to Farrell, that was also a hideously located pitch. A quick look at Cruz's heat maps shows that if you don't want him to make good contact you have to by all means avoid anything resembling a strike on the inner third. If you insist on trying to get him out in that situation, you have to either pitch him well away or in the dirt or both. Putting it in this spot was basically a white flag:
EDIT: To be clear, I agree that pitching to Cruz was dumb; Tazawa's failure is a footnote to Farrell's here.
EDIT: To be clear, I agree that pitching to Cruz was dumb; Tazawa's failure is a footnote to Farrell's here.
Here is Farrell describing the thought process ..
So .. Basically he is saying he is using regency bias (chasing the off speed stuff) and bogus stats 1-8) to justify the decision. But I think this is merely reinforcing the real reason. He trusts Tazawa here and doesn't trust Layne. But he can't say that without undermining Layne.
That was the dumbest managing decision I've seen from Farrell. It is indefensible to let Cruz hit in that situation. I don't care if he was 0-30 against Tazawa. You walk him and take your chances with Seager.
He obviously is? I don't think he is. Francona, Melvin, Showalter, Girardi, Bochy, Maddon, Matheny I would call bright. It's very hard to say or measure of course, but listening to the guy talk, I'd say Farrell is maybe average intelligence for a sports manager/coach. It's like wetting your finger and holding it up in the wind, or a golfer throwing some grass up in the air to check wind direction, and we'll never get any kind of IQ test for all the managers. Still, he's not bright.BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Tito made quite a few of questionable management decisions (especially with bullpen, SP). I don't see Farrell being any better or worse than Tito (maybe with base-running) - I think the leash is just shorter (with SOSH) because the FO has been unable to surround Farrell with the kind of talent that Tito was blessed to have on the roster from 2004-2011.
If Seager hits a walk-off instead of Cruz half this board would be quoting the Tazawa-Cruz matchup record as reasoning for Farrell to pitch to him.
If Seager hits a walk-off instead of Cruz half this board would be quoting the Tazawa-Cruz matchup record as reasoning for Farrell to pitch to him.
Tito passed the "sound test" (we have an "eye test", so why not a sound test). Farrell just doesn't give great confidence to me when I hear him talk.foulkehampshire said:
Farrell is just not a good in game manager. Last night was just the most recent example of bad managing from him. But like I said in the gamethread, much like the D-Backs were stuck with Brenly for a few years after he won in '01, the Sox are probably stuck with Farrell for a while because he won in '13. How much that championship is because he was at the helm and how much its that he happened to be there when it happened, who can tell. Personally I would love for them to get some new blood in there, but I know it won't happen.
Farrell MAY have been wrong; however, it was Tarawa's job to throw tempting pitches outside the strike zone, even imagining that the probable result would be a walk. Tazawa missed badly. Layne vs. Seager is probably not a much better matchup than Tazawa vs. Cruz. I'm a strong Junichi fan, but this loss was on him.Kilgore A. Trout said:
Al Zarilla said:
I don't really understand how anyone who has listened to both Terry Francona and John Farrell give interviews can claim that Tito is brighter than Farrell. Tito's no dummy, but Farrell has a much more subtle and articulate mind. He might be too smart for the job, if anything; I think some of his bad decisions are attributable to overthinking (and last night's might be a good example). One of Tito's strengths was that he was never afraid to do the obvious thing.
Pitching to Cruz at all was a mistake. Taz didn't execute, but he shouldn't have been in the game to start. Layne against a lefty, even one like Seager who has hurt the Sox in the past is still the right move. And there is no getting around it. And last night Farrell's screw up cost his team the game. That doesn't happen every time he does something stupid (which is the real problem with him- he doesnt manage well regardless of the outcome), but last night it did.mfried said:
You're nuts.mfried said:
Cruz is a .350 hitter with 15 bombs. .400 OBP. Maybe the best hitter in the AL right now. Seager is sub .300 OBP against lefties and Layne is sub .250 OBP against lefties.
I agree it was an egregious error, and Farrell was wise to own up to it. But saying "it cost the game" is an exaggeration. On the road, tied 1-1 in the bottom of the ninth, with a man on second, the Sox probability of winning that game was 40%, so he cost the team 2/5ths of a game. And I don't mean to quibble, it's just that I hear some fans (not you) count up the "losses" by manager during the season, and it way overstates the case, and the value of a manager's game decisions.Kilgore A. Trout said:
Savin Hillbilly said:
You make a good point about Francona. He never thought he was a genius, which enabled him to do the "obvious" thing, unless someone, who knew more, suggested otherwise. Which is why he was perfect for all those "charts and numbers" that Grady Little just ignored. And the times that Tito ignored the obvious, he usually had some personal motivational reason for a player involved. Playoff Francona was always by numbers.
When the offense scores 1 run, its real tough for the manager to look clever.
He's walking on egg shells the entire game.
He's walking on egg shells the entire game.
CTSOX said:
Where did I defend the decision, exactly? I think it was terrible, due to Tarawa's high leverage issues and the matchup with Cruz.
Any outcome that inning that ended up in a walk-off win for the Mariners would have ended up being scrutinized. Perhaps even rightly-so, considering the season to date.
And the manager has no control about that, not in motivating his players, getting them to focus more in the field, setting lineups, or otherwise putting his men in a position to succeed?benhogan said:
There has been a lot of underperformance from the team the last two years. I would be interested in seeing how Sox underperformance compares against the rest of the league.
The way this team is playing we just cannot afford a mistake like that by the manager.
That was an important game.
Everyone in the AL East had already lost.
A win would have brought us back to .500
Farrell is a terrible in game manager.
Theo got it right.
Joe Maddden would have been my choice.
That was an important game.
Everyone in the AL East had already lost.
A win would have brought us back to .500
Farrell is a terrible in game manager.
Theo got it right.
Joe Maddden would have been my choice.
And he does. But if you give him that credit, he also has to take responsibility for how badly last year and this year so far have gone.jimv said:
So he went from being the kind of manager who gets his team to over perform in 2013 to the kind that holds the players back just a year later? That makes absolutely no sense.Kilgore A. Trout said:
Well what's the alternative? He gets all the credit for 2013, but everything that's happened since has nothing to do with him? Or vice versa?Snodgrass'Muff said:
If that's so it suggests that the manager has little to do nothing to do with how his players play on the field, in which case what the hell is the point of having one at all?
Neither does pitching to Cruz with two out and first base open. It's jaw dropping stupidity. It's enough to get the attention of the players.Snodgrass'Muff said:
This is the way I recall watching that at bat:
- OK, they'll walk Cruz and let Tazawa pitch to Seager, set up a force at all the bases. I wonder what Tazawa's record is against a LHH like Seager?
- Pitching to him? That's nuts. Wait a minute, that pitch was up in the zone but Cruz swung through it. The guy has looked bad tonight. Still, Taz was lucky - walk the fucking guy.
- Pitch 2: in the dirt. OK, he's just going to pitch around him instead. Good.
- Pitch 3: Fastball way inside. Hit him for all I care.
- Pitch 4: Splitter in the dirt. Cruz swings over it. Jesus, OK, 2 strikes - throw him another and see if he bites.
- Pitch 5: Tazawa did. Cruz didn't. Good. One more...if he swings it's on to the 10th. If he walks it's on to Seager.
- Pitch 6: Some kind of pitch (splitter again?) that goes right into Cruz' wheelhouse. Game over.
What the fuck? How could he throw that pitch?
Funny, it never occurred to me to blame the manager. I went right into a flaming tirade against Tazawa (and Leon as the innocent bystander).
In hindsight, Farrell fucked up. If Taz had bought another Cruz K there, it would have been remarkably lucky and clever. Can't rely on luck.
In mindsight, Seager hit the next pitch into the RF stands. Let's beat Felix.
- OK, they'll walk Cruz and let Tazawa pitch to Seager, set up a force at all the bases. I wonder what Tazawa's record is against a LHH like Seager?
- Pitching to him? That's nuts. Wait a minute, that pitch was up in the zone but Cruz swung through it. The guy has looked bad tonight. Still, Taz was lucky - walk the fucking guy.
- Pitch 2: in the dirt. OK, he's just going to pitch around him instead. Good.
- Pitch 3: Fastball way inside. Hit him for all I care.
- Pitch 4: Splitter in the dirt. Cruz swings over it. Jesus, OK, 2 strikes - throw him another and see if he bites.
- Pitch 5: Tazawa did. Cruz didn't. Good. One more...if he swings it's on to the 10th. If he walks it's on to Seager.
- Pitch 6: Some kind of pitch (splitter again?) that goes right into Cruz' wheelhouse. Game over.
What the fuck? How could he throw that pitch?
Funny, it never occurred to me to blame the manager. I went right into a flaming tirade against Tazawa (and Leon as the innocent bystander).
In hindsight, Farrell fucked up. If Taz had bought another Cruz K there, it would have been remarkably lucky and clever. Can't rely on luck.
In mindsight, Seager hit the next pitch into the RF stands. Let's beat Felix.
I think it says something that we're 36 games into the season before we've had this thread.
Farrell made a mistake last night. But, as noted, there are 162 games of decisions a manager must make, and some will inevitably be incorrect (both in hindsight and in context of the situation at the time). The mistakes tend to be magnified, while the correct decisions tend to be dismissed as obvious, or simply go unnoticed.
In game management is one of many tasks of a manager; it's also the most easily scrutinized. It's also the one where everyone has an opinion, but one where there is little objective comparison between different managers beyond the very imperfect win-loss record. Joe Maddon is assumed to be a genius, but the basis of that assumption is never questioned or analyzed to any degree.
Someone needs to make out the lineup card, while also playing the always delicate balance between winning the game and preventing pitchers and position players from wearing down. Given the length of the season, it's probably the longer term roster usage that is one area where manager's make the difference. But it's probably also one of the harder facets to objectively study and analyze. So we're left with "Farrell must have done something right in 2013, but obviously did something wrong in 2014".
Whatever you think of Farrell, it's hard to blame him for the pitching staff atrocities for most of the first part of this season, and the recent hitting atrocities that are now in full swing now that the pitching staff has stabilized somewhat. The roster still matters; a lot.
Still, it was a bad decision, and at least Farrell owned up to it. But consider that had the lineup not been asleep all night against a journeyman pitcher then we're not having this conversation.
Farrell made a mistake last night. But, as noted, there are 162 games of decisions a manager must make, and some will inevitably be incorrect (both in hindsight and in context of the situation at the time). The mistakes tend to be magnified, while the correct decisions tend to be dismissed as obvious, or simply go unnoticed.
In game management is one of many tasks of a manager; it's also the most easily scrutinized. It's also the one where everyone has an opinion, but one where there is little objective comparison between different managers beyond the very imperfect win-loss record. Joe Maddon is assumed to be a genius, but the basis of that assumption is never questioned or analyzed to any degree.
Someone needs to make out the lineup card, while also playing the always delicate balance between winning the game and preventing pitchers and position players from wearing down. Given the length of the season, it's probably the longer term roster usage that is one area where manager's make the difference. But it's probably also one of the harder facets to objectively study and analyze. So we're left with "Farrell must have done something right in 2013, but obviously did something wrong in 2014".
Whatever you think of Farrell, it's hard to blame him for the pitching staff atrocities for most of the first part of this season, and the recent hitting atrocities that are now in full swing now that the pitching staff has stabilized somewhat. The roster still matters; a lot.
Still, it was a bad decision, and at least Farrell owned up to it. But consider that had the lineup not been asleep all night against a journeyman pitcher then we're not having this conversation.
Minus one for making the decision to pitch to him? Sure
But, plus one for taking the blame for the loss. Some recent managers might have thrown their player under the bus instead.
But, plus one for taking the blame for the loss. Some recent managers might have thrown their player under the bus instead.
This may be the wrong thread for this, but I'm not sure this merits its own thread yet.
It looks like Farrell has:
(1) started pulling Hanley for defensive purposes at the end of games, which is especially good since this was his unacceptable excuse for not doing so;
(2) realized that Napoli may need some time off; and
(3) decided that rather than telling Panda to stop switch-hitting, he's going to start benching him v. lefties (at least occasionally).
I think these are all good ideas, and I think you can argue that Farrell did the right thing to give all of those guys some time to pull it together before making these moves.
It looks like Farrell has:
(1) started pulling Hanley for defensive purposes at the end of games, which is especially good since this was his unacceptable excuse for not doing so;
(2) realized that Napoli may need some time off; and
(3) decided that rather than telling Panda to stop switch-hitting, he's going to start benching him v. lefties (at least occasionally).
I think these are all good ideas, and I think you can argue that Farrell did the right thing to give all of those guys some time to pull it together before making these moves.
Those are indeed good moves, Nattysez, but Farrell still makes head scratching Xs and Os decisions from time to time. I assume that a very large percentage of those watching the game on Friday night were calling for Cruz to be walked before he ended the game in predictable fashion. And the pinch running of Ortiz a few weeks ago (while more defensible than the Cruz move) is another example of bad in-game management in my view. (In case you've forgotten: http://boston.locals.baseballprospectus.com/2015/05/07/game-28-recap-rays-5-red-sox-3/)
Curt Schilling repeatedly says that Farrell's greatest strengths are his communication and leadership skills, and the Xs and Os can be taken care by the bench coach.
If that's true -- and I'd like to think that the manager would be more of a blend of both skill sets -- then I can see why Torey Lovullo keeps not getting hired as a Manager after repeated job interviews. More on his 7 Manager interviews: http://blogs.twincities.com/twins/2014/10/29/twinsights-teams-keep-passing-torey-lovullo/.
Curt Schilling repeatedly says that Farrell's greatest strengths are his communication and leadership skills, and the Xs and Os can be taken care by the bench coach.
If that's true -- and I'd like to think that the manager would be more of a blend of both skill sets -- then I can see why Torey Lovullo keeps not getting hired as a Manager after repeated job interviews. More on his 7 Manager interviews: http://blogs.twincities.com/twins/2014/10/29/twinsights-teams-keep-passing-torey-lovullo/.
