A Reprise

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Reprise : Agreed Lloyd. The same is true with me ... many of my NYY fan friends can't believe what happened.  They often include the way Torre was messed with in the comments.
    Posted by SinceYaz[/QUOTE]
    Excellent point.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]A Reprise    Of sorts … for the luckiest man alive.   I mean to say that fellow who fell into the managerial spot that was a championship team.   All he had to do was not mess it up.        I still cling to the hope, as unlikely as it is, that the Red Sox will make it to that second playoff spot.   But it is clear to me that having play off material on your bench doesn’t mean you have a play off team nor a championship team.     But we have had several here that have insisted that all Tito had to do to win, basically, was to get hired.   The vitriol against Tito was so astounding I thought I was in a Yanqui dug out many times.      The Francona Era needs to be revisited and many of his outspoken attackers need to come to terms with their erroneous claims.      If injuries don’t hinder a team from top level performance, as so many here insist, then what gives as the steering principle behind two World Series crowns?   If the core players perform so much differently in the light of one manager over another, what is one to consider?   I liked the unassuming and untested Grady Little, but he did make a few mistakes that we might consider cost the team significant wins, play off wins.   And I hoped the baseball genius, Bobby Valentine, would live up to the hype.   Maybe he still will.    But the marvel of it all, to me, is what is lost here.     What is that you might ask?   Oh, I know it could never be this simple.   The variables are way too complicated to come to this decision, but it certainly begs the question.     Isn’t it time we all reprise the Francona Factor?   Some claim it was worth at least a dozen losses a year.   All the while, the same would never consider that the 90+ wins a season would be a part of that Factor.   For those of us who might say, “I blame this loss on Terry,” it is time to say, “I blame these 8 fabulous years on Terry.”        Yesterday, my wife spoke to someone of a diamond ring my older son gave her.   Trying to remember when he had, we recalled it was at the return from his first tour of duty in Iraq.     When was that?   Eight years back or so … I said 2005.   He went off to basic training at Ft. Jackson during the same time as the Red Sox ended the 86 year drought …. I mean the same time.   October.   We saw him off in  Buffalo.   My son introducing me to another young fella who was also a Red Sox fan, a rarity in the city below Niagara Falls.   We are most thankful that he made it through two tours safely.    There is an ironic symmetry here for me… He was in Iraq for the end second World Series season and   …         well, all that to say, when Deb was talking about the ring, the memories of those days flooded back.   And the wonderful seasons as a Sox fan intermingled with the worrisome years of our son’s service – as well as the service of hundreds of thousands of other young Americans.   Dad was in his last days, or years, but to a man born in 1917, he got to see two World Series crowns before shuffling off this earthly coil.   Mmmm…   Emotional years to be sure.   But it brings me back to the point.   Terry, Tito deserves a post-service series of “thank you”s from us on this forum.   Bobby Valentine has had it rough – but Tito had Manny, for all the good and bad, and all the other personalities and they … won.   Twice.      I have a second posting I am working on that handles another perspective of the Francona Era, the World Series Era, but this is sufficient for now.       THANK YOU, TERRY FRANCONA.   YES, YOU WERE GIVEN THE TOOLS FOR THE JOB.   BUT UNLIKE ANYONE ELSE, YOU SHOWED YOU KNEW HOW TO USE THEM.   We will probably never see the like of your tenure for a very long time.   So, all the more, the richness of your seasons here is appreciated
    Posted by SinceYaz[/QUOTE]

    Great prose SY...but I disagree with the premise. I think that in all fairness Francona for most of his tenure was a very good clubhouse manager but a very poor tactician on the field. Countless times when it was evident to all that a pitcher was tiring Francona remained on the bench only to see that pitcher get shelled. No, its not an easy decision to determine when to remove a pitcher, but when the same mistake is made over and over and over again the pattern becomes evident. He also failed to utilize the full offensive arsenal at his disposal: bunting, hit and run, pinch hitting etc etc. To his credit he managed IMO much better in the playoffs than he did in the regular season, and he did win a couple of rings. I thank him for that. But in my mind he was not an outstanding manager; he was just so-so.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BOSOX1941. Show BOSOX1941's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]In Response to A Reprise : Great prose SY...but I disagree with the premise. I think that in all fairness Francona for most of his tenure was a very good clubhouse manager but a very poor tactician on the field. Countless times when it was evident to all that a pitcher was tiring Francona remained on the bench only to see that pitcher get shelled. No, its not an easy decision to determine when to remove a pitcher, but when the same mistake is made over and over and over again the pattern becomes evident. He also failed to utilize the full offensive arsenal at his disposal: bunting, hit and run, pinch hitting etc etc. To his credit he managed IMO much better in the playoffs than he did in the regular season, and he did win a couple of rings. I thank him for that. But in my mind he was not an outstanding manager; he was just so-so.
    Posted by pumpsie-green[/QUOTE]

    I'd say that just so-so is generous, but I can kind of accept it.  
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Reprise : I'd say that just so-so is generous, but I can kind of accept it.   
    Posted by BOSOX1941[/QUOTE]

    I make fun of Francona a lot, but I was trying to be fair. For many years his style of managing the clubhouse worked for this team-when the players policed themselves. But his field tactics were just aweful sometimes. Imagine, for example, that he let Wakefield keep trying for #200 when we were in a race for the playoffs, all the while watching him get bombed game after game? I realize that we had few good options at the time, but hell, anyone was better than Wakefield. Just one example.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Reprise : I make fun of Francona a lot, but I was trying to be fair. For many years his style of managing the clubhouse worked for this team-when the players policed themselves. But his field tactics were just aweful sometimes. Imagine, for example, that he let Wakefield keep trying for #200 when we were in a race for the playoffs, all the while watching him get bombed game after game? I realize that we had few good options at the time, but hell, anyone was better than Wakefield. Just one example.
    Posted by pumpsie-green[/QUOTE]

    Your Wake example is horrible, beyond the fact that he wasn't being put out there to get win No. 200. He was starting because the  Sox had no other options.

    But here's why the example is horrible. These are his first four starts after getting win No. 199.

    7 IP, 3 ER
    6.2 IP, 3 ER
    7 IP, 3 ER
    8 IP, 4 ER

    Are you kidding me. Any pitcher turning in those performances would be kept in the rotation. He should have had win No. 200 long before he did. So the theory that he stunk in all those games hurt the Sox is wrong.

    He finally had two-back-to-back bad starts and that's when he went to the bullpen. He went to the pen, had 4 IP, 0 ER then got another start and struggled. The start after that is when he got win No. 200. By the time he started struggling consistently, the Sox had deeper issues.

    That's the problem with a lot of the criticism of Francona. The facts often did not back up the complaint.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    Every major league manager leaves starting pitchers in 'too long' a bunch of times during the year in the effort to not burn out the bullpen.  Last year the bullpen got burned out anyway!  Not sure why this is so hard to understand.  162 games, 7-man bullpens, starters only lasting an average of about 6 innings a game.  It's a necessity. 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: A Reprise

    What is it exactly that a Baseball Manager does again?  The only easier job is Welfare Recipient.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Reprise : Your Wake example is horrible, beyond the fact that he wasn't being put out there to get win No. 200. He was starting because the  Sox had no other options. But here's why the example is horrible. These are his first four starts after getting win No. 199. 7 IP, 3 ER 6.2 IP, 3 ER 7 IP, 3 ER 8 IP, 4 ER Are you kidding me. Any pitcher turning in those performances would be kept in the rotation. He should have had win No. 200 long before he did. So the theory that he stunk in all those games hurt the Sox is wrong. He finally had two-back-to-back bad starts and that's when he went to the bullpen. He went to the pen, had 4 IP, 0 ER then got another start and struggled. The start after that is when he got win No. 200. By the time he started struggling consistently, the Sox had deeper issues. That's the problem with a lot of the criticism of Francona. The facts often did not back up the complaint.
    Posted by royf19[/QUOTE]

    Yeah, lets look at the facts. Wakefield took EIGHT TRIES to get to #200. He finally won a game on Sept 13 after not winning a game since JULY 24. After his win on July 24 here is what he did:

    7 innings, 3 ER
    6.2, 3 ER
    7, 3 ER
    8, 4 ER
    5.1, 4 ER
    4, 4 ER
    4, 0
    5, 4 ER

    Then he finally won a game pitching six innings and surrendering FIVE RUNS. Are these the kind of performances a team in a postseason chase needs? Hell no. His ERA remained OVER 5. As I said the options were limited, but Francona was an idiot (again) not to try someone else.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Reprise : Yeah, lets look at the facts. Wakefield took EIGHT TRIES to get to #200. He finally won a game on Sept 13 after not winning a game since JULY 24. After his win on July 24 here is what he did: 7 innings, 3 ER 6.2, 3 ER 7, 3 ER 8, 4 ER 5.1, 4 ER 4, 4 ER 4, 0 5, 4 ER
    Posted by pumpsie-green[/QUOTE]

    For those games you listed he had an ERA of 4.50.  That's very typical for a back-end starter in the AL.  He should have had a couple wins in the first 4 games you listed.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Reprise : Yeah, lets look at the facts. Wakefield took EIGHT TRIES to get to #200. He finally won a game on Sept 13 after not winning a game since JULY 24. After his win on July 24 here is what he did: 7 innings, 3 ER 6.2, 3 ER 7, 3 ER 8, 4 ER 5.1, 4 ER 4, 4 ER 4, 0 5, 4 ER Then he finally won a game pitching six innings and surrendering FIVE RUNS. Are these the kind of performances a team in a postseason chase needs? Hell no. His ERA remained OVER 5. As I said the options were limited, but Francona was an idiot (again) not to try someone else.
    Posted by pumpsie-green[/QUOTE]
    Who else, specifically, was there? Look at the roster. Wake was out there simply because there was no one else.


     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]Every major league manager leaves starting pitchers in 'too long' a bunch of times during the year in the effort to not burn out the bullpen.  Last year the bullpen got burned out anyway!  Not sure why this is so hard to understand.  162 games, 7-man bullpens, starters only lasting an average of about 6 innings a game.  It's a necessity. 
    Posted by Hfxsoxnut[/QUOTE]

    Halifax,

      Your point is well mentioned.  It was an issue that I was properly schooled about.  I have mentioned how I remember the great Earl Weaver always pulling his guys before the shadow of four runs loomed.  I know he had the horses to do it, but I still looked up to him as an example of the best.  But that was then and this is now, and pitching is a very different game, strategically.

      In the end, I finally realized that sometimes the starting pitcher was given up as a sacrificial lamb, so the pen might get some rest.  I have noticed several other teams have left even their aces in to get shelled.  It saves the arm of the "mop up" pitcher and maybe more.

      Again, point well made. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Reprise : For those games you listed he had an ERA of 4.50.  That's very typical for a back-end starter in the AL.  He should have had a couple wins in the first 4 games you listed.
    Posted by Hfxsoxnut[/QUOTE]

    From July 29 to Sept 7 inclusive (the period of time in between his wins) his ERA was 4.79, not 4.50. See the link included below. Obviously we needed better than that, or at least it was time to give someone else a chance. There are always alternatives.

    http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=wakefti01&t=p&year=2011
     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from illinoisredsox. Show illinoisredsox's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Reprise : Yeah, lets look at the facts. Wakefield took EIGHT TRIES to get to #200. He finally won a game on Sept 13 after not winning a game since JULY 24. After his win on July 24 here is what he did: 7 innings, 3 ER 6.2, 3 ER 7, 3 ER 8, 4 ER 5.1, 4 ER 4, 4 ER 4, 0 5, 4 ER Then he finally won a game pitching six innings and surrendering FIVE RUNS. Are these the kind of performances a team in a postseason chase needs? Hell no. His ERA remained OVER 5. As I said the options were limited, but Francona was an idiot (again) not to try someone else.
    Posted by pumpsie-green[/QUOTE]

    Okay Pumpsie,

    Here are the results of Wakefield's first 5 attempts to win his 200th:

    1.  July 29: lost 3-1
    2.  August 4:  left after 7 tied at 3
    3.  August 9:  left after 7 with the lead, bullpen blew win #200
    4.  August 14:  CG loss 5-3
    5.  August 20:  left after 5 1/3 with the lead, bullpen blew win#200

    After that, his pitching went downhill until he got #200 in September.

    He was what we had and out of those first 5 tries, the bullpen blew his 200th not once but twice, he left tied and lost a game in performances that any one of us would take from any starter and he lost one game 5-3.  Four reasonably decent shots that didn't work out for him. But of course you would have yanked him after the first couple for what reason and replaced him with who?
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]Still baffles me how many on here blame the manager for this season and praise tito who by the way was the skipper of one of the biggest choke jobs last september. Tito overall did a great job but after last September it was clear he lost the team as the players took advantage of his kindness with them. What I am getting at is this is on the players who need to be accountable stop makeing excuses and be profesionals and at least be in shape.
    Posted by bosbruins2011cup[/QUOTE]

    Soooo ... if I were grading out Tito, according to you,

       8 Years  - Great 

       1 Month - Choke.

      Oh wait, you changed in mid-stream and placed the blame on the players ...

        I nearly fell over when I stepped on that banana peel.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from jete02fan. Show jete02fan's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    Yaz-o, as always...top notch...Cool
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]Still baffles me how many on here blame the manager for this season and praise tito who by the way was the skipper of one of the biggest choke jobs last september. Tito overall did a great job but after last September it was clear he lost the team as the players took advantage of his kindness with them. What I am getting at is this is on the players who need to be accountable stop makeing excuses and be profesionals and at least be in shape.
    Posted by bosbruins2011cup[/QUOTE]
    On one hand, you blame Francona for last September. On the other, you say the players need to be held accountable.

    I certainly agree with the latter. Last September, the starters' ERA was nearly 7 and the bullpen blew six saves in nine opportunities. Casey Stengel himself couldn't have reversed that.

    Though I thought Valentine was a bad fit all along, I can't blame him for this disappointing season. It's not his fault the pitching has been awful and just about everyone has been on the DL at one time or another.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThefourBs. Show ThefourBs's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Reprise : On one hand, you blame Francona for last September. On the other, you say the players need to be held accountable. I certainly agree with the latter. Last September, the starters' ERA was nearly 7 and the bullpen blew six saves in nine opportunities. Casey Stengel himself couldn't have reversed that. Though I thought Valentine was a bad fit all along, I can't blame him for this disappointing season. It's not his fault the pitching has been awful and just about everyone has been on the DL at one time or another.
    Posted by LloydDobler[/QUOTE]

    Yup, the FO screwed up by giving Valentine the job in the first place.
    It just made a bad situation worse.

    That said,there isn't a manager in the league that could've prevented the pathetic pitching performances we got last Sept and this year.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Reprise : Your Wake example is horrible, beyond the fact that he wasn't being put out there to get win No. 200. He was starting because the  Sox had no other options. But here's why the example is horrible. These are his first four starts after getting win No. 199. 7 IP, 3 ER 6.2 IP, 3 ER 7 IP, 3 ER 8 IP, 4 ER Are you kidding me. Any pitcher turning in those performances would be kept in the rotation. He should have had win No. 200 long before he did. So the theory that he stunk in all those games hurt the Sox is wrong. He finally had two-back-to-back bad starts and that's when he went to the bullpen. He went to the pen, had 4 IP, 0 ER then got another start and struggled. The start after that is when he got win No. 200. By the time he started struggling consistently, the Sox had deeper issues. That's the problem with a lot of the criticism of Francona. The facts often did not back up the complaint.
    Posted by royf19[/QUOTE]

    I'd take those 4 starts on any rotation, and I'd beg for them on the 2012 Sox. They still miss Wakefield, even now.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Reprise : Okay Pumpsie, Here are the results of Wakefield's first 5 attempts to win his 200th: 1.  July 29: lost 3-1 2.  August 4:  left after 7 tied at 3 3.  August 9:  left after 7 with the lead, bullpen blew win #200 4.  August 14:  CG loss 5-3 5.  August 20:  left after 5 1/3 with the lead, bullpen blew win#200 After that, his pitching went downhill until he got #200 in September. He was what we had and out of those first 5 tries, the bullpen blew his 200th not once but twice, he left tied and lost a game in performances that any one of us would take from any starter and he lost one game 5-3.  Four reasonably decent shots that didn't work out for him. But of course you would have yanked him after the first couple for what reason and replaced him with who?
    Posted by illinoisredsox[/QUOTE]

    I can look up baseballreference.com too. And I can see how he did statistically. Only once in 8 games did he limit the opposition to fewer than three runs, and his ERA during that time was 4.79 and was over 5 for the year. He clearly didn't have it. I would have tried to pick up someone over the waiver wire or given one of the Pawtucket boys a shot. In the end, Wakefield's failure had a lot of company. Beckett and Lester both stunk. It was a total team effort to lose that kind of lead over the Rays and while I hold the players partially accountable, I also hold Francona accountable. There is plenty of blame to go around. Francona IMO failed to make the moves he had to do to stem the tide, or at least to try to stem the tide. He just sat and spat.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Reprise : Yup, the FO screwed up by giving Valentine the job in the first place. It just made a bad situation worse. That said,there isn't a manager in the league that could've prevented the pathetic pitching performances we got last Sept and this year.
    Posted by ThefourBs[/QUOTE]

    If there isn't another manager in the league who could have prevented those pathetic pitching performances, then Valentine never had a fair shot, did he.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Reprise : I can look up baseballreference.com too. And I can see how he did statistically. Only once in 8 games did he limit the opposition to fewer than three runs, and his ERA during that time was 4.79 and was over 5 for the year. He clearly didn't have it. I would have tried to pick up someone over the waiver wire or given one of the Pawtucket boys a shot. In the end, Wakefield's failure had a lot of company. Beckett and Lester both stunk. It was a total team effort to lose that kind of lead over the Rays and while I hold the players partially accountable, I also hold Francona accountable. There is plenty of blame to go around. Francona IMO failed to make the moves he had to do to stem the tide, or at least to try to stem the tide. He just sat and spat.
    Posted by pumpsie-green[/QUOTE]

    So what did Valentine do to fix the starting pitching this year?  Nothing.  It's even worse.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThefourBs. Show ThefourBs's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Reprise : I can look up baseballreference.com too. And I can see how he did statistically. Only once in 8 games did he limit the opposition to fewer than three runs, and his ERA during that time was 4.79 and was over 5 for the year. He clearly didn't have it. I would have tried to pick up someone over the waiver wire or given one of the Pawtucket boys a shot. In the end, Wakefield's failure had a lot of company. Beckett and Lester both stunk. It was a total team effort to lose that kind of lead over the Rays and while I hold the players partially accountable, I also hold Francona accountable. There is plenty of blame to go around. Francona IMO failed to make the moves he had to do to stem the tide, or at least to try to stem the tide. He just sat and spat.
    Posted by pumpsie-green[/QUOTE]

    What "moves", specifically, was Francona supposed to make?

    Assuming, of course, that managers are able to make roster moves.
    Which, they are not.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Reprise : What "moves", specifically, was Francona supposed to make? Assuming, of course, that managers are able to make roster moves. Which, they are not.
    Posted by ThefourBs[/QUOTE]

    I would have considered making Aceves a SP and used the pen to fill in for him after the 5th or 6th inning. Bowden was available. He could have gone to Epstein and asked for another SP via the wire and told him that he wasn't going to be able to start Wakefield any more. There were no good options, but Francona selected a poor one. History validates that opinion.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: A Reprise

    In Response to Re: A Reprise:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Reprise : So what did Valentine do to fix the starting pitching this year?  Nothing.  It's even worse.
    Posted by Hfxsoxnut[/QUOTE]

    Of course it is. There is nothing either manager could do about the performance of the players. I hold neither one accountable for that. At least Valentine has tried other options like Cook and Morales. Francona could never think outside the box. He was one of the least creative managers I have ever seen in 50 years of watching ball.
     

Share