And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxPatsCelts1988. Show SoxPatsCelts1988's posts

    And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    Anyone have an explanation?  I can't think of one?
     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    He threw Wakefield back because he knew he had a fatter one in the bullpen.

    Wink
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BOSOX1941. Show BOSOX1941's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    In Response to And Francona pulled Wakefield because???:
    [QUOTE]Anyone have an explanation?  I can't think of one?
    Posted by SoxPatsCelts1988[/QUOTE]
    The explanation is simple. He is a managerial buffoon!.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from udontnojack. Show udontnojack's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    because he's coma and he doesn't have a clue on how to manage a game.i wish there was a good managerial candidate out there somewhere.can we talk joe torre into coming back
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Road-Warrior. Show Road-Warrior's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    In Response to And Francona pulled Wakefield because???:
    [QUOTE]Anyone have an explanation?  I can't think of one?
    Posted by SoxPatsCelts1988[/QUOTE]




    There's a shock.
    How is that 114 win prediction going?




     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from JB-3. Show JB-3's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    Or that he isn't stretched out as his longest outing of the year is 3.1 innings.  Wake was at 76 pitches.
     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from REDSOX-11. Show REDSOX-11's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    Got a good laugh over your answer. Haven't seen you post in awhile glad you are back. I do agree with it too.


    In Response to Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???:
    [QUOTE]In Response to And Francona pulled Wakefield because??? : The explanation is simple. He is a managerial buffoon!.
    Posted by BOSOX1941[/QUOTE]
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from REDSOX-11. Show REDSOX-11's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    So why even bother sending him out for the 6th. The timing was poor as usual when to pull wake. Another dumb move.


    In Response to Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???:
    [QUOTE]Or that he isn't stretched out as his longest outing of the year is 3.1 innings.  Wake was at 76 pitches.
    Posted by JB-3[/QUOTE]
     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from lifelongsoxdawg. Show lifelongsoxdawg's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    I don't buy the 76 pitch pitch count senario. Wakefield has been used sparingly this year so he has plenty of life in his arm. Besides, 76 pitches in 5 2/3 innings is right on par for a starter. He was also going well, having struck out the 3 previous batters. BAD DECISION BY FRANCONA TO PULL HIM AND REPLACE HIM WITH BOBBY JINX.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxPatsCelts1988. Show SoxPatsCelts1988's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    In Response to Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???:
    [QUOTE]I don't buy the 76 pitch pitch count senario. Wakefield has been used sparingly this year so he has plenty of life in his arm. Besides, 76 pitches in 5 2/3 innings is right on par for a starter. He was also going well, having struck out the 3 previous batters. BAD DECISION BY FRANCONA TO PULL HIM AND REPLACE HIM WITH BOBBY JINX.
    Posted by lifelongsoxdawg[/QUOTE]

    Plus... HE'S A KNUCKEBALLER.  There shouldn't be pitch counts.  He should stay in until he struggles.  To hand the game over to what looks like our worst reliever is just plain stupid.  If we were up 6-0 then that's fine... but 2-0? c'mon.  At least Crawford ended up getting a walk off hit because of it.  Maybe that will get him going.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from REDSOX-11. Show REDSOX-11's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    Some of these people must be related to francoma. Only reason I can see for defending this clueless little league at best manager. We could only hope to talk to Mr Torre about the job as this teams needs a leader like him .


    In Response to Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???:
    [QUOTE]I don't buy the 76 pitch pitch count senario. Wakefield has been used sparingly this year so he has plenty of life in his arm. Besides, 76 pitches in 5 2/3 innings is right on par for a starter. He was also going well, having struck out the 3 previous batters. BAD DECISION BY FRANCONA TO PULL HIM AND REPLACE HIM WITH BOBBY JINX.
    Posted by lifelongsoxdawg[/QUOTE]
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

     www.boston.com/community/persona.html?UID=862c62380273033ac029cfbfc17e2da0&plckUserId=862c62380273033ac029cfbfc17e2da0">
    Posts: 3234
    First: 4/11/2009
    Last: 5/1/2011

    Anyone have an explanation?  I can't think of one?


      How about this as a better alternative to the big explosion that Tim somtimes gives up.   Going along just fine then BOOOOM!

      Tito can't win for losing.  Take the pitcher out early, he's a bum.  Leave him in too long, he's a bum.

      We gotta make up our minds about this.

      I, for one, am glad he took Tim out while things were going well.  My one complaint about Tito is leaving guys in too long.  Not this time.  He did well.   
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from mrmojo1120. Show mrmojo1120's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    If Crawford had flown out in his last at bat,this is would have been a thread from the Francona bashers:

    "Why didn't Francoma have Mike Cameron pinch hitting for Carl Crawford with 2 outs in the 9th?"
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from REDSOX-11. Show REDSOX-11's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    I do agree with this and had some concerns myself. but after one HIT? I would not have pulled him until he gave up ONE more hit or walk. Once the runner reaches 2nd base it is time. But this was a bad decision when he made it and after he did sure was proved out.


    In Response to Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???:
    [QUOTE]  www.boston.com/community/persona.html?UID=862c62380273033ac029cfbfc17e2da0&plckUserId=862c62380273033ac029cfbfc17e2da0 " /> SoxPatsCelts1988 Posts: 3234 First: 4/11/2009 Last: 5/1/2011 Anyone have an explanation?  I can't think of one?   How about this as a better alternative to the big explosion that Tim somtimes gives up.   Going along just fine then BOOOOM!   Tito can't win for losing.  Take the pitcher out early, he's a bum.  Leave him in too long, he's a bum.   We gotta make up our minds about this.   I, for one, am glad he took Tim out while things were going well.  My one complaint about Tito is leaving guys in too long.  Not this time.  He did well.   
    Posted by SinceYaz[/QUOTE]
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    Because softy... eh, hem...I mean GM called Tito on the red line and asked to save his behind.

    It's tiresome changing one's moniker every few weeks.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from REDSOX-11. Show REDSOX-11's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    BOLOGNA


    In Response to Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???:
    [QUOTE]If Crawford had flown out in his last at bat,this is would have been a thread from the Francona bashers: "Why didn't Francoma have Mike Cameron pinch hitting for Carl Crawford with 2 outs in the 9th?"
    Posted by mrmojo1120[/QUOTE]
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    In Response to Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???:
    [QUOTE]  www.boston.com/community/persona.html?UID=862c62380273033ac029cfbfc17e2da0&plckUserId=862c62380273033ac029cfbfc17e2da0 " /> SoxPatsCelts1988 Posts: 3234 First: 4/11/2009 Last: 5/1/2011 Anyone have an explanation?  I can't think of one?   How about this as a better alternative to the big explosion that Tim somtimes gives up.   Going along just fine then BOOOOM!   Tito can't win for losing.  Take the pitcher out early, he's a bum.  Leave him in too long, he's a bum.   We gotta make up our minds about this.   I, for one, am glad he took Tim out while things were going well.  My one complaint about Tito is leaving guys in too long.  Not this time.  He did well.   
    Posted by SinceYaz[/QUOTE]

    spc, you should know that I rarely second-guess managers. I'm not ripping Tito here because I haven't heard his reasoning yet. But it's reasonable to question why he took him out after the one hit. I wouldn't have gone more than one more batter, but it did seem to be a quick hook.

    And in this case, I though he kept Jenks in a batter or two too long, and I say this because of Jenks' recent performance.

    But the Sox won and that's what matters. If Tito did make a bad decision, his team balled him out and that's what's supposed to happen. Someone makes a bad decison or bad play, and other pick them up. It's called being a team.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hetchinspete. Show Hetchinspete's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    In Response to Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???:
    [QUOTE]  www.boston.com/community/persona.html?UID=862c62380273033ac029cfbfc17e2da0&plckUserId=862c62380273033ac029cfbfc17e2da0 " /> SoxPatsCelts1988 Posts: 3234 First: 4/11/2009 Last: 5/1/2011 Anyone have an explanation?  I can't think of one?   How about this as a better alternative to the big explosion that Tim somtimes gives up.   Going along just fine then BOOOOM!   Tito can't win for losing.  Take the pitcher out early, he's a bum.  Leave him in too long, he's a bum.   We gotta make up our minds about this.   I, for one, am glad he took Tim out while things were going well.  My one complaint about Tito is leaving guys in too long.  Not this time.  He did well.   
    Posted by SinceYaz[/QUOTE]

    Yaz,

    You got it right. When Wake is going well he's great, but once he hits the wall, it's like throwing a beach ball up to the plate and he falls apart quickly. If Tito leaves him in and he gets hit, Tito's a bum. If he takes him out Tito's an idiot. I agree with you in that he tends to leave pitchers in too long sometimes, but you can't argue with his record in Boston. Trouble is now that Red Soz fans have gotten useto winning with the two Wrld Series, anything less is not acceptable. Like many Pat's fans, they are spoiled by winning. 

    Hetchinspete.   
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

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

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???

    Since I live in Seattle, I am unable to get the NESN feed when the Sox play the M's, so I had to watch it on ROOT Sports NW instead.  Dave Sims and Mike Blowers seemed understand fully why Wakefield was taken out.  Their explanation is even though he is a knuckleball pitcher, he can still get tired.  And, because he hadn't been stretched out, he probably gave Francona more than was expected out of a spot start.  Were the Sox announcers saying the same thing, or were they wondering why Wakefield was pulled? 

    My guess, and it is only a guess, is that Francona was happy that Wakefield gave him at least 5, and sent him out in the 6th with the thought that if he lets a guy on, he would lift him. 
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BOSOX1941. Show BOSOX1941'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??? : spc, you should know that I rarely second-guess managers. I'm not ripping Tito here because I haven't heard his reasoning yet. But it's reasonable to question why he took him out after the one hit. I wouldn't have gone more than one more batter, but it did seem to be a quick hook. And in this case, I though he kept Jenks in a batter or two too long, and I say this because of Jenks' recent performance. But the Sox won and that's what matters. If Tito did make a bad decision, his team balled him out and that's what's supposed to happen. Someone makes a bad decison or bad play, and other pick them up. It's called being a team.
    Posted by royf19[/QUOTE]
    It's also called winning "In Spite of Francona".
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from mrmojo1120. Show mrmojo1120's posts

    Re: And Francona pulled Wakefield because???


     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share