John Farrell

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

    John Farrell

    This guy is a good portion of the reason the RS lose games that they could have and should have won, especially games at home...  He goes too long with pitchers, refuses to realign the batting order, i.e move Pedroia out of the 3rd slot and doesn't seem to believe in bunting and moving runners.

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from GoUconn13. Show GoUconn13's posts

    Re: John Farrell

    In response to bingobilly's comment:

    This guy is a good portion of the reason the RS lose games that they could have and should have won, especially games at home...  He goes too long with pitchers, refuses to realign the batting order, i.e move Pedroia out of the 3rd slot and doesn't seem to believe in bunting and moving runners.

     



    Did he win 73 games this year?  Why bother to change the line up.  Yes Dempster should have been taken out a bit earlier, but that Garnder fly ball was catchable if the coaching staffs didnt tell the OF to shift more to the left.  Ellsbury was not in the center field spot, and he was playing more on the left field wall which that was why Garnder got an easy long fly ball triple.  Had it was caught, it will be 2 outs and Boston will be up by one run instead down by one run!!

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Javi60. Show Javi60's posts

    Re: John Farrell

    Weeks ago I pointed out that JF was a master of clubhouse chemistry but very questionable as a dugout strategist... Each day I am more and more convinced... last night handling of the pitchers was awful...seven runs out of Demster?...the stubborness of Pedroia as a third hitter... Carp benched against righties in Toronto and before... Etc etc... 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Javi60. Show Javi60's posts

    Re: John Farrell

    My line up tonight: Ellsb, pedie, papi 1b; Carp lf, salty, drew, midlbrks, nava or victorino, pitcher

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: John Farrell

    In response to GoUconn13's comment:

    In response to bingobilly's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    This guy is a good portion of the reason the RS lose games that they could have and should have won, especially games at home...  He goes too long with pitchers, refuses to realign the batting order, i.e move Pedroia out of the 3rd slot and doesn't seem to believe in bunting and moving runners.

     

     



    Did he win 73 games this year?  Why bother to change the line up.  Yes Dempster should have been taken out a bit earlier, but that Garnder fly ball was catchable if the coaching staffs didnt tell the OF to shift more to the left.  Ellsbury was not in the center field spot, and he was playing more on the left field wall which that was why Garnder got an easy long fly ball triple.  Had it was caught, it will be 2 outs and Boston will be up by one run instead down by one run!!

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You are trying too hard to defend. Keep it simple. Dempster stinks.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from GoUconn13. Show GoUconn13's posts

    Re: John Farrell

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    In response to GoUconn13's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to bingobilly's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    This guy is a good portion of the reason the RS lose games that they could have and should have won, especially games at home...  He goes too long with pitchers, refuses to realign the batting order, i.e move Pedroia out of the 3rd slot and doesn't seem to believe in bunting and moving runners.

     

     

     



    Did he win 73 games this year?  Why bother to change the line up.  Yes Dempster should have been taken out a bit earlier, but that Garnder fly ball was catchable if the coaching staffs didnt tell the OF to shift more to the left.  Ellsbury was not in the center field spot, and he was playing more on the left field wall which that was why Garnder got an easy long fly ball triple.  Had it was caught, it will be 2 outs and Boston will be up by one run instead down by one run!!

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You are trying too hard to defend. Keep it simple. Dempster stinks.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Agree with you that Dempster do stinks.  But had he just mind his own business, he wouldnt be giving up seven runs.  He made too many pitching mistakes just like Jon Lester.

    Really if Bucholtz is back by now, Dempster wouldnt be pitching last nite.   Boston do not have a whole alot choice on who should be the 5th starter!!!

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from ANONMD08. Show ANONMD08's posts

    Re: John Farrell

    I was against the Dempster signing. Even though it was only a 2 year contract but over 13 mil a year is way too much. He spent a majority of his career pitching for the Cubs in the NL central. A lot different from the AL East. Hopefully buchholz will be back for the last month. It  was a tough spot to put britton in with bases loaded and 1 out. I think a glaring weakness is SS because there were a couple of balls he couldv'e had. 

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: John Farrell

    In response to GoUconn13's comment:

    In response to bingobilly's comment:

     

    This guy is a good portion of the reason the RS lose games that they could have and should have won, especially games at home...  He goes too long with pitchers, refuses to realign the batting order, i.e move Pedroia out of the 3rd slot and doesn't seem to believe in bunting and moving runners.

     

     



    Did he win 73 games this year?  Why bother to change the line up.  Yes Dempster should have been taken out a bit earlier, but that Garnder fly ball was catchable if the coaching staffs didnt tell the OF to shift more to the left.  Ellsbury was not in the center field spot, and he was playing more on the left field wall which that was why Garnder got an easy long fly ball triple.  Had it was caught, it will be 2 outs and Boston will be up by one run instead down by one run!!

     




    I think it would have been caught if SV was healthy

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

    Re: John Farrell

    In response to bingobilly's comment:

     

    This guy is a good portion of the reason the RS lose games that they could have and should have won, especially games at home...  He goes too long with pitchers, refuses to realign the batting order, i.e move Pedroia out of the 3rd slot and doesn't seem to believe in bunting and moving runners.

     

     



    Fickle stuff; Nobody's ever happy with the RS Mgr. For starters, BPs are not indestructible, as recent injuries can attest to; they have to be conserved carefully. Farrell, a former P coach knows this; for example he leads the league in by far in an unusual but telling stat; unnecessary warmups. To wit; Uehara only warmed up TWICE this season without coming in. The RS also have had a remarkable rebound from 2012.

     

    If the SP is inadequate, blame the FO.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from trouts. Show trouts's posts

    Re: John Farrell

    Farrell has had a terrific season but last night's game was not one of his better games. After Arod homers, Nunez gets his 3rd hit a line-drive single off the wall in left. That was the time to hook Dempster but he leaves him in to pitch to Overbay who rips a line-drive single and walks Stewart on 4 pitches. Then he goes to Britton with the bases juiced, a guy who looked lousy on the West Coast swing and someone who has had trouble getting lefties out. Anyway Gardner crushed one for a basesoaded triple and the Sox squander a 6-3 lead. With the score 6-4 Sox they needed to stop the threat right then and Farrell chose to stay with Dempster, who had zero left in the tank. Didn't make a similar gaff against the Angels when they were up 7-3 on the coast and blew that one? In the bottom of the inning Middlebrooks draws a 4 pitch walk and it would be a perfect time (down one run) for Ellsbury to bunt him over but no, Ellsbury, who was having trouble with Sabbathia, strikes out and the threat goes away. I also thought it was too early to be plunking Arod, especially leading off an inning. 

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

    Re: John Farrell


    I think Farrell has been pretty good, very good if you consider our record. My one issue last nigth would have been going to Britton in that situation....it was a key moment in the game, So I would have thought Breslow would have been a better choice.....Britton has been bad is last 5 outings....he is a rookie.....and I know he struck Gardner out Friday night but that was in the 9th of a 10-3 game...We are realy thin in the BP...other than Uehara, Tazawa and Breslow....not sure Farrell has confidence in anyone else....Morales still tring to find himself...Workman has been Ok, but again a rookie, who looked better as a starter.....De La Rosa hasnt impressed me....not performance wise but I havent seen the electrics stuff he suppposedly has....I would really like to see us pick up another veteran RHH reliever who may have cleared waivers, though I don't think there is any decent ones who have....I suppose Dempster may have to be that guy if/when Buch comes back...he obviously has BP experience and his best ERA this year is his 1st Inning ERA of .252 and it gets progressively worseas the game goes on.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: John Farrell

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    In response to GoUconn13's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to bingobilly's comment:

     

    This guy is a good portion of the reason the RS lose games that they could have and should have won, especially games at home...  He goes too long with pitchers, refuses to realign the batting order, i.e move Pedroia out of the 3rd slot and doesn't seem to believe in bunting and moving runners.

     

     



    Did he win 73 games this year?  Why bother to change the line up.  Yes Dempster should have been taken out a bit earlier, but that Garnder fly ball was catchable if the coaching staffs didnt tell the OF to shift more to the left.  Ellsbury was not in the center field spot, and he was playing more on the left field wall which that was why Garnder got an easy long fly ball triple.  Had it was caught, it will be 2 outs and Boston will be up by one run instead down by one run!!

     

     




    I think it would have been caught if SV was healthy

     

    [/QUOTE]


    ^^THIS^^

    It almost looked like he pulled up instead of going for it like he would usually do. Too many hits to the wall this year. Looked like he didnt want to do that again because thats what it would have took to catch that ball.

    The only complaint I have with Farrell is the handling of the pitching staff.

    Dempster was great at the start of the season with no run support, then he has been dealing with a groin issue for a month or 2 now. He certainly wont complain about it though because hes not that way.

     

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

    Re: John Farrell

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    Fickle stuff; Nobody's ever happy with the RS Mgr. For starters, BPs are not indestructible, as recent injuries can attest to; they have to be conserved carefully. Farrell, a former P coach knows this; for example he leads the league in by far in an unusual but telling stat; unnecessary warmups. To wit; Uehara only warmed up TWICE this season without coming in. The RS also have had a remarkable rebound from 2012.

    If the SP is inadequate, blame the FO.



    Always hate it when Yankee fans are the voice or reason.

     

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

    Re: John Farrell

    There are several things that Farrell has done or not done that don't make sense. But it is hard to quibble with success. He has done a good job by any fair evaluation. If this team folds in the stretch, the blame should go to Ben Cherington.

    Stabbed by Foulke.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from slasher9. Show slasher9's posts

    Re: John Farrell

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to GoUconn13's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to bingobilly's comment:

     

    This guy is a good portion of the reason the RS lose games that they could have and should have won, especially games at home...  He goes too long with pitchers, refuses to realign the batting order, i.e move Pedroia out of the 3rd slot and doesn't seem to believe in bunting and moving runners.

     

     



    Did he win 73 games this year?  Why bother to change the line up.  Yes Dempster should have been taken out a bit earlier, but that Garnder fly ball was catchable if the coaching staffs didnt tell the OF to shift more to the left.  Ellsbury was not in the center field spot, and he was playing more on the left field wall which that was why Garnder got an easy long fly ball triple.  Had it was caught, it will be 2 outs and Boston will be up by one run instead down by one run!!

     

     

     




    I think it would have been caught if SV was healthy

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    ^^THIS^^

     

    It almost looked like he pulled up instead of going for it like he would usually do. Too many hits to the wall this year. Looked like he didnt want to do that again because thats what it would have took to catch that ball.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    THIS^^^^

    i wonder though....i watched it 4 times on my DVR and the angle he was running at he could have simply kept going, caught it, and continued on into the "triangle".  i dont even think he would have hit the wall if he caught it.  but it was obvious he pulled up on that ball.  big difference if he catches it.  but there are always "if's" in games....

    sigh....off to the west coast.  hopefully SF will be kind to us the next 3 days.....

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

    Re: John Farrell

    In response to slasher9's comment:

     


    THIS^^^^

     

    i wonder though....i watched it 4 times on my DVR and the angle he was running at he could have simply kept going, caught it, and continued on into the "triangle".  i dont even think he would have hit the wall if he caught it.  but it was obvious he pulled up on that ball.  big difference if he catches it.  but there are always "if's" in games....

    sigh....off to the west coast.  hopefully SF will be kind to us the next 3 days.....

     




    That's true, but he probably didn't know that.

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from donrd4. Show donrd4's posts

    Re: John Farrell

    In response to bingobilly's comment:

    This guy is a good portion of the reason the RS lose games that they could have and should have won, especially games at home...  He goes too long with pitchers, refuses to realign the batting order, i.e move Pedroia out of the 3rd slot and doesn't seem to believe in bunting and moving runners.

     



    Where in the h..ell are these posters coming from? Can you check and see if there is anything in your water?

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

    Re: John Farrell

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:

    In response to slasher9's comment:

     


    THIS^^^^

     

    i wonder though....i watched it 4 times on my DVR and the angle he was running at he could have simply kept going, caught it, and continued on into the "triangle".  i dont even think he would have hit the wall if he caught it.  but it was obvious he pulled up on that ball.  big difference if he catches it.  but there are always "if's" in games....

    sigh....off to the west coast.  hopefully SF will be kind to us the next 3 days.....

     




    That's true, but he probably didn't know that.

     



    It would have been a spectacular catch, the kind only the best get; maybe Puig would have nabbed it, if he is indeed the next Clemente.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: John Farrell

    In response to bingobilly's comment:

    This guy is a good portion of the reason the RS lose games that they could have and should have won, especially games at home...  He goes too long with pitchers, refuses to realign the batting order, i.e move Pedroia out of the 3rd slot and doesn't seem to believe in bunting and moving runners.

     



    Nonsense.  I agree Dempster stayed in too long, but overall Farrell has been masterful with pitchers and lineups.  Last timeout, the complaint was Dempsterncame out too soon.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from charliedarling. Show charliedarling's posts

    Re: John Farrell

    I am a John Farrell fan.  He has to be given credit to where the team is this year compared to where it was last year when it may have actually had more talent.

    But, as a couch manager, I would really like to see David Ortiz hit in the third spot to make sure that the team's best hitter gets to the plate in the first inning.  Supporting Ortiz with the rest of the order if he bats third is no different than if Ortiz bats fourth.


    Last night's game is over.  Beat SF!

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

    Re: John Farrell

    It makes no matter what the "experts..." predicted.  The concept of "prediction" is nothing more than some scribe or yak, yak attempting to justify his/her "talent" for which there really is no value.

     

    Success is dynamic and difficult to measure.  As the team/person/employee or whoever gets closer to the goal line the "boss" moves the line further out.  As humans, we need to always be trying to improve or we'll become stale and eventually less than useful to others and to ourselves.

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: John Farrell

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    In response to GoUconn13's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to bingobilly's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    This guy is a good portion of the reason the RS lose games that they could have and should have won, especially games at home...  He goes too long with pitchers, refuses to realign the batting order, i.e move Pedroia out of the 3rd slot and doesn't seem to believe in bunting and moving runners.

     

     

     



    Did he win 73 games this year?  Why bother to change the line up.  Yes Dempster should have been taken out a bit earlier, but that Garnder fly ball was catchable if the coaching staffs didnt tell the OF to shift more to the left.  Ellsbury was not in the center field spot, and he was playing more on the left field wall which that was why Garnder got an easy long fly ball triple.  Had it was caught, it will be 2 outs and Boston will be up by one run instead down by one run!!

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You are trying too hard to defend. Keep it simple. Dempster stinks.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You are so blinded. Do you even enjoy when they win?

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

    Re: John Farrell

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

    In response to bingobilly's comment:

     

    This guy is a good portion of the reason the RS lose games that they could have and should have won, especially games at home...  He goes too long with pitchers, refuses to realign the batting order, i.e move Pedroia out of the 3rd slot and doesn't seem to believe in bunting and moving runners.

     

     



    Nonsense.  I agree Dempster stayed in too long, but overall Farrell has been masterful with pitchers and lineups.  Last timeout, the complaint was Dempsterncame out too soon.

     



    That's exactly why Farrell didn't manage well. Dempster had only thrown 88 pitches through 7 innings, given up 1 run and in the previous inning had retired the side on a 1,2,3 inning yet he removes him.

    Last night he had thrown at or near 100 in the 6th inning, was struggling yet left him in.

    Where is the logic in that?

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share