And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

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

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    In Response to Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???:
    [QUOTE]Olivo hits 4-13 .308 vs Wake and was 0-4 versus Jenks. It is all about match ups. It is also as one stated Wake despite being a knukleball thrower had not gone more than 3 1/3 before this.
    Posted by JimfromFlorida[/QUOTE]

    C'mon Jim. That dog don't hunt.
    There was absolutely no logical explanation for pulling Wakefield when he did. he's given up two hits prior to that hit to Langerhans, and a with good throw by Pedroia, I contend Cust's double was the only legitimate one.
    Face it, Francona is one of the worst strategerial managers in the league, and bringing in Jenks to redeem himself from his previous abysmal outing was just plain idiocy.
    Captain Peachfuzz cost Wake a win yesterday and to quote BOSOX, won in spite of him.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from sunslav. Show sunslav's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    On the postgame show Tito gave the explanation. It was based on the statistics in the database that MLB managers have access to and apparently self proclaimed armchair managers in this forum do not. The statistics used involved the matchup between the next batter vs. Wake and vs. Jenks. Tito employed this information in making his decision. Stop trying to outguess someone unless you have all of the information next to your armchair.

    Jenks studied his mechanics after the game and pinpointed the flaw in his mechanics and will work on correcting it starting today. It helps to watch pregame, postgame, and read everything before coming here and mouthing off when you are not qualified to do so. Be a fan and just enjoy the games. It is your dog that doesn't hunt because he eats dogfood fortified entirely with 20-20 hindsight.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from mrmojo1120. Show mrmojo1120's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    From ESPN.com:
    Working very well with catcher Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Wakefield walked just one, throwing 53 of his 76 pitches for strikes, just a tick under 70 percent. A brisk breeze blowing in also worked to his advantage, as he registered five flyball outs.
    Wakefield had no issues with being lifted when he was. Francona had talked to him about that possibility after the fifth, given that he hadn't been stretched out at all this season.
    "I was shocked I got into the sixth,'' Wakefield said.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    Sunslav, notin -- good posts. I questioned pulling Wake when he did and like I posted, I thought he should have faced one more batter. But I wasn't going to rip Tito before hearing his reasons.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    Wakefield said he was shocked he lasted that long. Wind was blowing in, sun was an issue for hitters, and Wakefield had been just sitting for a month on the de facto DL. It had to be a shock. Would have been nice to see Tito leave this ace in as long as Felix. I'm sure everyone was confident that Wake could have gone a lot deeper.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    In Response to Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???:
    [QUOTE]Francoma doesn't mind leaving Josh in for 125 or so pitches.  This guy needs to go . We have a good team now and all we need is a great manager. He can't make a good decision without  John F. there. So get rid of him.  Wake could have gone 8 ininings and saved his bullpen. What a dumb a--... 
    Posted by Kat-b2[/QUOTE]

    Easy Kat.  You will give your Tito-bashing family a bad name if you point to Farrell as the leadership bastion when he was here.  The same people who destroy Tito destroyed John F.  If Tito doesn't make good decisions on when to pull pitchers/keep them in, that ain't nothin' new.  He has supposedly been doing that for years, all through the Farrell tenure.  So how did John help him make good decisions, when he apparently didn't make any good ones then either?
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimdavis. Show jimdavis's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    In Response to Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???:
    [QUOTE]Seattle had the worst offense in the AL, a year ago. This year, there is only one team worse in OPS. They are a terrible offensive team. As I said before this game, Wakefield going a few innings and getting lucky does not validate the fact he is a waste of a roster spot. A revolving door of AAA'ers could have gone 5 and change, Aceves to name one. Except Aceves is a legitimate decent pen option, as well, unlike Wakefield. Wakefield needs to go, and this fumes off the de facto DL merely confirms it. Tito took him out because it was miracle he lasted that long.
    Posted by BaseballGM[/QUOTE]

    You state things again as fact that are simply opinion.  Wake owned you in this game and you hoped he fail.  Too bad for you, Softy.
     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from DaffyDan. Show DaffyDan's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    Because if he left him in he would have given up 22 runs and proven Master Softlaw right that Wake's career is toast, and Theo couldn't have that.

    It's all so simple really. 

    -Daf. 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimdavis. Show jimdavis's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    In Response to Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???:
    [QUOTE]Tito gave his answer in a postgame interview. His answer sounded logical to me. One should watch the postgame to get answers to within game decisions if you really wish to be realistic and honest.   Don't come here to read or shout drivel without doing your homework. The forum's reality / honesty police will give you demerits if you fail to do your homework. I am surprised that the Babe didn't use his red highlighter on some of these shortsighted comments. Not one person in yesterday's game thread was aware of the matchup data on the next batter against Wake and Jenks. Not one here was aware that there was a pitch count that Wake and Tito agreed upon prior to the game.
    Posted by pike[/QUOTE]

    Pike:

    You, along with sunslav, put a nice ribbon on the topic.  I always say the organization has more information about any topic we discuss here.  People usually respond to that by saying that it is their right to question moves.  That is entirely true.  However, when they spout off like they are experts, I have to laugh.  There was a reason that that all the decision makers agreed on yet some want Theo to fire Tito for making moves Theo agrees with.  Also, the team NEEDS Jenks to figure it out for the Sox to have success.  So, they can't just mot use him or dfa the guy.    All this in a game the team WON.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    What did you expect him to say, "I made a mistake for pulling Wake too soon, and brought in the wrong guy"?
    That's the problem with Francona. He's manages games on paper instead of the field!
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    You state things again as fact that are simply opinion.  Wake owned you in this game and you hoped he fail.

    Wake doesn't "own" an active roster spot. What is a fact is that he admitted he couldn't believe he lasted that long, and he is on the de facto DL with a mop bucket unless he is in the rotation. Now, claime he should be in the rotation if you would like, but don't claim that he couldn't be parked in AAA between these once a month spot starts. Call up Aceves and demand Wakefield agree to a AAA assignment, or continue this fiasco of Wakefield back to the de facto DL.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from DaffyDan. Show DaffyDan's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    Only Master Softlaw could paint a verteran pitcher that can start or relieve better than most as a liability. 

    And with 17 innings pitched, Wakefield now leads the bullpen in innings pitched. Without this 5.2, he would have been second in innings pitched. 

    Perhaps someome should look up both "de facto" and "DL/Diabled List" in the dictionary. 

    -Daf. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    Provide the "relief" game logs. Anyone can "pitch in relief". The question is whether he can pitch well out of the pen in a lot of close game situations. The answer is, no! If he isn't in the rotation, and he most certainly should not be more than the 8th or 9th starter fallback, he has no business on the de facto DL sitting in the pen holding a mop.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    I agreed with pulling Wake even though Jenks was terrible and darn near lost the game.

    No way can you call what Wake did yesterday lucky.  For one thing, he shut down Ichiro, who was killing us.  For another, the three 53/76 pitches for strikes, which is 70%, fantastic.  For another, zero runs in 5.2 innings (I discount the 1 run because Jenks gave up two walks and a single to get the guy left on first by Wake home). 

    When the knuckler is working, Wake can be devastating, which he was.  It's that simple.  It's why they have him on the roster.  Bravo, Theo--and Terry for using him. 
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    In Response to Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???:
    [QUOTE]I agreed with pulling Wake even though Jenks was terrible and darn near lost the game. No way can you call what Wake did yesterday lucky.  For one thing, he shut down Ichiro, who was killing us.  For another, the three 53/76 pitches for strikes, which is 70%, fantastic.  For another, zero runs in 5.2 innings (I discount the 1 run because Jenks gave up two walks and a single to get the guy left on first by Wake home).  When the knuckler is working, Wake can be devastating, which he was.  It's that simple.  It's why they have him on the roster.  Bravo, Theo--and Terry for using him. 
    Posted by maxbialystock[/QUOTE]

    Even a blind squirrel will find an acorn once in a while. I said last week that Francona would mail it in Sunday, finding an excuse to sit Buchholz and start Wake. He never expected to win this game, and was not going to waste Buchholz on a game he didn't think he could win. There is so many on this board who can't see the forest for the trees.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from MikeNagy. Show MikeNagy's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    In Response to Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because??? : Even a blind squirrel will find an acorn once in a while. I said last week that Francona would mail it in Sunday, finding an excuse to sit Buchholz and start Wake. He never expected to win this game, and was not going to waste Buchholz on a game he didn't think he could win. There is so many on this board who can't see the forest for the trees.
    Posted by Alibiike[/QUOTE]

    You really think he gives up on games before they are played? Anything can happen on a given day. He told Buchholz to pretend he was sick? That would send a great message to the team.

    Besides, Buchholz hasn't been pitching that well himself so far, as to save for another day.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimdavis. Show jimdavis's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    In Response to Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because??? : Even a blind squirrel will find an acorn once in a while. I said last week that Francona would mail it in Sunday, finding an excuse to sit Buchholz and start Wake. He never expected to win this game, and was not going to waste Buchholz on a game he didn't think he could win. There is so many on this board who can't see the forest for the trees.
    Posted by Alibiike[/QUOTE]

    You are flat out making stuff up now.  Why would you think the Sox could not win a home game with Clay on the mound?  This is flat out, misplaced Wake/Tito hatred.  Just take the win and move on.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    The nonsense level on this board never ceases to amaze me.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BertoSoxFan. Show BertoSoxFan's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    The question isn't why he pulled Wakefield.  He was protecting him.  I want to know why he didn't feel, as I'm sure many of us did, that Wakefield had done something special and deserved to be relieved by someone other than our biggest nightmare/science-experiment? 

    That was a delicate and important lead.  Every lead is delicate and important when you're a losing ball club, but to stake a lead against King Felix as a substitute in the rotation--that was big.  I felt deep gratitude to our old knuckleballer at that point in the game.  How could Francona be so clueless and careless with that lead.  Bring in Jenks when we're losing by five runs, not when we're desperately trying to avoid another sweep.  Make him prove himself when we can afford his antics.  How many times are we gonna get kicked btween the legs by a guy before we remember the pain and think twice about sending him out there when he can hurt us. 

    Francona may have great long-distance vision, but he always seems lost in the moment.  He has no touch.  We were very lucky to win that game. 
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from ALaGatorAL. Show ALaGatorAL's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    In Response to Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because??? : You really think he gives up on games before they are played? Anything can happen on a given day. He told Buchholz to pretend he was sick? That would send a great message to the team. Besides, Buchholz hasn't been pitching that well himself so far, as to save for another day.
    Posted by MikeNagy[/QUOTE]

    What messages do you think he has sent to this team so far this season ?? Whatever they may have been, Do you think they're working ?? Trouble Is I don't think this guy sends any messages and has every appearance of a deer in the headlights on most occasions !! As Far as Torre is concerned, There was a reason he was called him Clueless Joe in NY. This current makeup of Red Sox seem to need a fire lit under their collective azzes and it just don't seem Like Francona has the stomach for it. Say what you will about Joe Madden but, after his tantrum in Chicago Tampa is like 15-6 with supposedly NO OFFENSE whatsoever.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    Provide the "relief" game logs. Anyone can "pitch in relief".

    Just like you asked for the Papi logsvs LH'd starters, then when proven wrong, you moved the goalpost... again.

    The question is whether he can pitch well out of the pen in a lot of close game situations. The answer is, no! If he isn't in the rotation, and he most certainly should not be more than the 8th or 9th starter fallback, he has no business on the de facto DL sitting in the pen holding a mop.

    Just because Tito hasn't pitched him much in close games, doesn't prove he can't do it.

    Usng Wake's numbers after returning from back surgery is not really fair, since you don't let us count Oki's decline due to injury and now blame Papi's decline vs LHPs on injuries as well.

    He was jerked from starter to relief 11 times in 2010 and had many stretches of no IP and many spot starts with little warning.

    Anyways, here's Wake's relief logs from 2010 to today:
    His first game in relief in a long long time (May 1, 2010) :
    Dice-K lets up 6 runs, the Sox are down 7-4 with a man on 2ndand in comes Wake. He gets the K to end the inning, but has tis line:
    IP   H  ER  BB
    2.1  5  3   0

    Next he faces the Yanks for 2 games:
    4  2  1  0  (Both games out of reach/mop up)

    After a spot start he faces the Yanks in relief again
    Dice-K let up 7 runs and the game is 7-6 - a close game:
    2.1  1  0  0
    (Papelbon lets up 4 in the ninth, blows Wake's win, and we lose 11-9)

    Then the 8 IP 5 hit 0 ER at Philly vs Halliday and a few more starts ...

    Next relief after 11 starts and then 10 days off with no work:
    7/30 vs Detroit Sox down 4-1 in 8th: Close game? Maybe.
    Wake comes in and BB, bunt single to 1B, Bunt Sac, Wild Pitch and weak Groundout, 2 runs score. 
    2  1  2  1

    8/2 vs CLE Sox lose 6-5 and Wake pitches the7th and 8th innings. Close game.
    2  1  0  2

    8/8 at NYY: Beckett let up 5 in te 5th, Sox down 7-1 and 7-2 as Wake finishes the game (not close): 
    3  1  0  0

    8/13 @ TX: a slugfest 9-9 in the 11th, in comes Wake: Boom HR. Close game.
    0  1  1  0 (Loss)

    8/19 vs LAA: Beckett and MDC let up 7 runs in the 5th and 6th. Sox down 7-1 when Wake gets the call. Not close.
    2  1  0  0

    8/20 vs Tor (no days rest after 2 IP day before) Sox killed 16-2
    2  3  0  0

    Wake starts a game on Aug 25th (5.2 IP  3 ER & Loss), Sox lose 10-3.
    Then back to the pen and 10 days no action before his next game.

    9/4 vs CWS: Sox losing 3-1 and Wake pitches the 8th and 9th. Close game. 
    2  2  0  0

    4days later he starts vs TB (5 IP  4 ER & the win) Sox win 11-5.
    Then jerked back to the pen after a 9 day rest.

    9/17 v Tor. Toronto is up 10-5 in  the 7th with a man on 1st & 3rd. Wake gets a flyball out. The Sox score 2 in the 8th and 2 in the 9th to make it close, but we lose 11-9. Wake kept us in it. Not really a close game when hecame in, but
    close at the end.
    2.1  3  0  0

    9/29 @ CWS on 12 days rest:Sox down 4-2 and Wake comes in in the 8th: close game
    1  2  1  0

    Wake starts one more game and the season ends.

    2011 season (No games close until his start)

    4/1   0.1  0  0  1 (L9-5)
    4/2   1.2  1  1  0 (L12-5)
    4/6   2.0  1  1  0 (L8-4)
    4/9   2.0  0  0  0 (L9-4)
    4/11 3.1  6  4  1 (L16-5)
    4/18 1.0  1  1  0 (W9-1)
    4/27 1.0  0  0  0  (L5-4) O's up 4-0 when Wake comes in-not close by softy's goalpost moving standards.

    OK, let's look at Wake's record in "close games" like softy asked...

    9 IP  10 Hits 2 ER  2 BB

    ERA:    2.00
    WHIP:  1.33

    Cue: spin and goalpost moving by softy...eh, hem..I mean GM.



     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    Those aren't 2011 game logs, Slav.

    Wake's 2010 ERA and WHIP were quite poor.

    But, since you worked so hard to try and snipet a case for Wakefield in the pen, make your case why he makes sense in a close game with runners on base? End of story, Slav!

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    Those aren't 2011 game logs, Slav.

    Umm, yes they are (not counting his last start). Try reading a whole post. It's on the bottom. I didn't bother to give the game situations in detail, because I admit that none have been in crucial games, but I gave the game logs (IP  H  ER  BB).

    Listen clown: you made the bogus statement, "
    The question is whether he can pitch well out of the pen in a lot of close game situations. The answer is, no!"

    Well, I provided the facts that hehas not pitched in a close game in relief all year, so there are no "game logs" to provide any evidence that he has or has not or can or can not "pitch well" in close games situtions this year. Get it, fool?

    I clearly stated: "2011 season (No games close until his start)".

    What part of that don't you understand? You've made the point all year and now you ask for game logs to prove or disprove your theory about him pitching in close games. There is NO EVIDENCE either way.


    Wake's 2010 ERA and WHIP were quite poor.

    Do you want to count 2010 or not? First you say you want to look at only close game in 2011 when there ar none. I gave you the game logs of close relief gmes in 2010 and Wake did well in limited action (9IP). You disregarded it, then turn to ERA and WHIP from 2010 to try an make another point. Your constant goalpost moving is making me dizzy.

    By the way, Wake's WHIP in 2010 was no poor.
    His WHIP from 2010-2011 (all after back surgery) is 1.30. Buch's is 1.29. Before ou bust a gasket making false claims that I amsaying Wakeis as good as Buch, you need some lessons inlogic. You missed those days at the Rush Limbaugh School of Nitwits. It is you who brought up his WHIP as being poor. Are you saying Buch's is poor or will you move the goalpost again?

    Wake's 1.30 WHIP is 64th in MLB out of the top 147 pitchers by IP (110+ IP since 2010). He's .003 from 49th place on the WHIP list. That is hardly "poor". Remember you called VMart an "upper tier" first baseman because he had numbers that placed him 13th out of 30?

    Do the math, clown, 64/147.

    But, since you worked so hard to try and snipet a case for Wakefield in the pen, make your case why he makes sense in a close game with runners on base? End of story, Slav!

    No clown: it's not. All I said was that Tito should use him in more critcal situations than he has thus far this year. I am saying Tito should go from zero times to some times. I am not saying Wake should be the closer orcome in with bases loaded in the 7th, 8th, or 9th.

    Why are you adding the "with runners on" to "close games"? Your moving of the goalpoats and repositioning of the issue is classic Karl Rove tactics that don't fly with me.

    When a manager does not have confidence in a pitcher for critical situations, what can happen to make that change?
    1) The said pitcher does well in non-critical situations enough times to start gaining trust and eventually gets worked into more and more critical situations slowly. If he continues to do well, he may become a steady high leverage pitcher. If not, he goes back to square one. It's been this way for as long as I have followed baseball.
    2) Other pitchers on said pitcher's team are doing so poorly in critical situations that a manager might be forced to try something he may not be too comfortable trying, but out of desperation may give said pitcher a chance. The results may determin if it cntinues or not.

    Based on Wake's record this year and his decent releif work last year, I think it is perfectly reasonable to think that Tito may start to use Wake in closer games...NOT in the mniddle of an inning, but starting an inning in a close game and maybe going 2-3 or more innings if needed.

    Softy...with Wake and you, it's a "neverending story".

    You act like it's harness and I who are overly obsessed with Wake, but in fact, it is you. I don't think i have started a threadon Wake since my 2008 thread : "Wake Bashers-Wake Up". Yes, the same thread you frequented by saying Wake should have retired after 2007. Then Wake ran off his best career 50 game stretch and turned you into a scorned beeahtch. Now, it's all about your pride and swollen ego. Get over yourself and realize this guy has been a very good pitcher until his back surgery, then a decent pitcher in 2010 (if you look at WHIP and percentage of games he put our team into a good position to win as a starter and a 3.60 ERA/1.040 WHIP as a reliever.) Look around the league: Wake is still better than about a fourth or third of the starters. You want a guy like him cut? You are a joker, a clown, a racist drivel king, and worse.

    Take a bucket of potato salad and cram it over your thick skull.

    Maybe you can see better that way.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    Damn it Moon, you mentioned everything I was gonna say - and more!
    The clown's obsession with Wake is reaching psychotic levels.

    No matter what the thread or discussion is at the time, he diverts it to Wake.
    If AGONE goes 0-4, he calls Wake on it.
    If Scut doesn't play, Wake gets bashed.
    If Ellsbury goes 3-4, Wake gets trashed.

    If his golf game is a smidgen off, he takes out his Wake-hate board.
    Everywhere he comes up short - on or off a baseball forum - Wake is the reason.
    There's a medical term for this...
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share