Just curious

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

    Just curious

    Listen, I fully admit that I am not a fan of Francona and his managing skills, but I just want to ask an open question, mainly out of curiosity, to anyone who might like to throw out an answer: what level of inconsistent performance by the Sox would it take to acknowledge that it MIGHT have something to do with the manager? (Many times this season, including the last 5 games, the Sox have had some big production games interspersed with shutouts/low production games. On the other hand, they have rebounded admirably from their 2-10 start and have had their share of injuries again this year.) I am aware that a number of posters believe that because Francona was the manager when the Sox won in '04 and '07 that gives him a lifetime pass of sorts on all things managerial, but given how the Sox have performed this year, I still think my question is worth pondering.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from emp9. Show emp9's posts

    Re: Just curious

    In Response to Just curious:
    [QUOTE]Listen, I fully admit that I am not a fan of Francona and his managing skills, but I just want to ask an open question, mainly out of curiosity, to anyone who might like to throw out an answer: what level of inconsistent performance by the Sox would it take to acknowledge that it MIGHT have something to do with the manager? (Many times this season, including the last 5 games, the Sox have had some big production games interspersed with shutouts/low production games. On the other hand, they have rebounded admirably from their 2-10 start and have had their share of injuries again this year.) I am aware that a number of posters believe that because Francona was the manager when the Sox won in '04 and '07 that gives him a lifetime pass of sorts on all things managerial, but given how the Sox have performed this year, I still think my question is worth pondering.
    Posted by pschuller[/QUOTE]

    "Many times this season, including the last 5 games, the Sox have had some big production games interspersed with shutouts/low production games."

    Show me a team that hasn't done that.  Seriously! Just. Don't worry about it man. Football is in two days. Go watch that. It's real easy to keep track of.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from pschuller. Show pschuller's posts

    Re: Just curious

    In Response to Re: Just curious:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Just curious : "Many times this season, including the last 5 games, the Sox have had some big production games interspersed with shutouts/low production games." Show me a team that hasn't done that.  Seriously! Just. Don't worry about it man. Football is in two days. Go watch that. It's real easy to keep track of.
    Posted by emp9[/QUOTE]

    Yankees for starters, and I expect Angels, Brewers, perhaps Tigers, and even Rays. The operative point here is not how many teams get shut out or score just 1-2 runs in a number of games but how many teams score double digit runs in a number of games, are close to the league lead in run production, and yet still get shut out a lot or have a bunch of low production games, especially following high production games.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Just curious

    In Response to Just curious:
    [QUOTE]Listen, I fully admit that I am not a fan of Francona and his managing skills, but I just want to ask an open question, mainly out of curiosity, to anyone who might like to throw out an answer: what level of inconsistent performance by the Sox would it take to acknowledge that it MIGHT have something to do with the manager? (Many times this season, including the last 5 games, the Sox have had some big production games interspersed with shutouts/low production games. On the other hand, they have rebounded admirably from their 2-10 start and have had their share of injuries again this year.) I am aware that a number of posters believe that because Francona was the manager when the Sox won in '04 and '07 that gives him a lifetime pass of sorts on all things managerial, but given how the Sox have performed this year, I still think my question is worth pondering.
    Posted by pschuller[/QUOTE]

    Hey psschuler,

    Would you care to elaborate exactly in what areas you see him as being so deficiant he needs to be replaced? I am a fan of the Red Sox and have been since the 1960's and frankly the past decade has been the best run in almost a century for the home town nine and Francona has been at the helm for most of that run.

    That said, I don't think that his 2 titles have earned him the right to sit on his laurels...Hardly and I would venture to guess that John Henry would concur...Managers in baseball are fired or not re-signed for a myriad of reasons. Francona is part of a very successful management team and as long as he continues to follow the program and isn't seen as counter to the cause his job is secure. His job is to take the personnal given and make the best of them with the goal of making the playoffs and competing for championships while continuing to raise shareholder value....

    While you may not be a fan of his managing skills, he has forgotton more about the game of baseball than the collective we on this site has ever learned. It's not about todays game it's about 162 games and then being in  the best position to win it all...I'd say that since 2007 we've yet to get to the psot season unscaved (key injuires)...it appears 2011 will be no different...
    His resume since taking over the Red Sox is among the best of all the big market guys and he and Leyland I believe are the only two that have mulitple rings...

    2004...champion
    2005...playoff team
    2006...injuries derailed a promising year
    2007...champion
    2008...1 game away from a world series with a roster that was diminsihed due to injuires...
    2009...Playoff team...
    2010...see 2006...I guess Francona should've been able to coax more out of a team that was decimated by injuries....
    2011...on pace to win 100 games...currently struggling due to a miriad of injuries to key players with a 7 game lead in the wild card...

    what's not to like?
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: Just curious

    In Response to Re: Just curious:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Just curious : 2011...on pace to win 100 games...currently struggling due to a miriad of injuries to key players with a 7 game lead in the wild card... what's not to like?
    Posted by Beantowne[/QUOTE]
    To be precise, the Red Sox field a talented team that is on a .600 pace to win 97.2 games.
     
  6. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Just curious

    In Response to Re: Just curious:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Just curious : To be precise, the Red Sox field a talented team that is on a .600 pace to win 97.2 games.
    Posted by hill55[/QUOTE]

    I guess I should've qualified it with before their recent struggles were on pace to win 100 games...
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from emp9. Show emp9's posts

    Re: Just curious

    In Response to Re: Just curious:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Just curious : Yankees for starters, and I expect Angels, Brewers, perhaps Tigers, and even Rays. The operative point here is not how many teams get shut out or score just 1-2 runs in a number of games but how many teams score double digit runs in a number of games, are close to the league lead in run production, and yet still get shut out a lot or have a bunch of low production games, especially following high production games.
    Posted by pschuller[/QUOTE]

    Didn't mean to be so rude. I apologize. OK, Let's take the Yankees, just because thy're the first team you mentioned.

    On May 19th, NYY beat Balt. 13-2. On May 20th they lost to the Mets 1-2.

    On June 13th, NNY Lost to Cle. 0-1. On June 14th they beat the Rangers 12-4.

    On April 23, NNY beat Bal. 15-3. On April 25 they lost to the White Sox 0-2.

    On June 22, NYY beat Cin. 4-2. The second game they lost to Cin. 2-10.

    On Aug. 5th, NYY beat Bos. 3-2. On Aug. 6th they lost to Bos. 4-10.

    Every team does this. Not sure how much you can read into it.

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

    Re: Just curious

    In Response to Just curious:
    ... given how the Sox have performed this year, I still think my question is worth pondering.
    Posted by pschuller[/QUOTE]

    It's maddening, friend, when the potent offense rolls up like a HoHo ...

    but how is that the manager's fault when the professional hitters don't make the right connection at the right time?

    It's irritating when our best pitchers have off days and get slapped like a dazed cat stuck in a dog kennel.

    Again, how is that the manager's fault?

      ...given how they've performed this year ....

       Losing Clay early for the whole season .... so far ...

       Losing Dice-K even earlier for the whole season...

       Losing Lackey and Becket for a while ...

       Having Cam and D-Mac start off thinking they were playing golf instead of baseball ... you know, the LOW score wins ...

      Losing JD Drew (shhhhh, please don't yell at me about that) .... and him never really getting started this year.

         Losing Jed again ...

      Carl's icy start and DL stint...

      Pedey and Youk's slow start ....

      Pap's few bad games ...

      Losing Jenks....for most of the season

      Losing Wheeler for a while

      We had Catcher 101 being taught by Catcher Emeritus ....

      Considering we are at .600 and 2.5 games out in early September ...

      Are a lock for th eplayoffs unless the wheels come all the way off...

      I'd say we are in dem fine shape.
     
          Dem fine.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from PawsoxPhil. Show PawsoxPhil's posts

    Re: Just curious

    In Response to Just curious:
    [QUOTE]Listen, I fully admit that I am not a fan of Francona and his managing skills, but I just want to ask an open question, mainly out of curiosity, to anyone who might like to throw out an answer: what level of inconsistent performance by the Sox would it take to acknowledge that it MIGHT have something to do with the manager? (Many times this season, including the last 5 games, the Sox have had some big production games interspersed with shutouts/low production games. On the other hand, they have rebounded admirably from their 2-10 start and have had their share of injuries again this year.) I am aware that a number of posters believe that because Francona was the manager when the Sox won in '04 and '07 that gives him a lifetime pass of sorts on all things managerial, but given how the Sox have performed this year, I still think my question is worth pondering.
    Posted by pschuller[/QUOTE]

    Why wouldn't one blame meeting up against a great pitching performance from the opposing team one day and a reverse of that on the following day? If the entire roster of the opposition has a lights out day on a specific game then why is that the entire blame of our manager? You seem to be illogical, are looking for a simplistic solution ( instead of complex), trying to scapegoat, or else you are just bugging the forum by trolling. Which is it? Yazzer knows and enjoys your effort.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

    Re: Just curious

    Actually, 

       it's a lot harder finding someone who will talk about Tito in a balanced way than to see the countless corncob jobs people give him here.

      There isn't one Tito supporter here that doesn't have some problems with the way he manages.  But I am willing to take his pluses with his minuses.  AND to ask folks like you (that would be Yazzer) who are relentless in your hammering to give him a proper shake.

      I've said it many times I wish he'd pull the pitchers earlier.  I also have said I cannot fathom why he put two .100+ hitters in the line up at once.

      He doesn't get carte blanche, but he does get credit. 

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

    Re: Just curious

    Since Yaz is taking the trolls seriously again.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

    Re: Just curious

    Phil,

      I've taken my toddy and am just winding down for my nap.

      So anything that comes out now I am not responsible for ....

      I'm not typing drunk ... I'm typing buzzed ....

      I'm not drunking type ... I'm buzzard
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from pschuller. Show pschuller's posts

    Re: Just curious

    In Response to Re: Just curious:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Just curious : Didn't mean to be so rude. I apologize. OK, Let's take the Yankees, just because thy're the first team you mentioned. On May 19th, NYY beat Balt. 13-2. On May 20th they lost to the Mets 1-2. On June 13th, NNY Lost to Cle. 0-1. On June 14th they beat the Rangers 12-4. On April 23, NNY beat Bal. 15-3. On April 25 they lost to the White Sox 0-2. On June 22, NYY beat Cin. 4-2. The second game they lost to Cin. 2-10. On Aug. 5th, NYY beat Bos. 3-2. On Aug. 6th they lost to Bos. 4-10. Every team does this. Not sure how much you can read into it.
    Posted by emp9[/QUOTE]

    Certainly I concur that a lot of teams go up and down, sometimes one day to the next, but it seems to me the Sox have been shut out alot this year, and I just don't think it's all just whether "the stars are in alignment" that would explain how they could not score a run against Toronto for 11 innings one night, then go nuts offensively the next. There is of course no way to prove it, which is why I asked an open ended question, rather than making a categorical statement, but it does seem to me that the way a manager motivates his team has something to do with such a phenomenon.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from pschuller. Show pschuller's posts

    Re: Just curious

    In Response to Re: Just curious:
    [QUOTE]Actually,    I'ts a lot harder finding someone who will talk about Tito in a balanced way than to see the countless corncob jobs people give him here.   There isn't one Tito supporter here that doesn't have some problems with the way he manages.  But I am willing to take his pluses with his minuses.  AND to ask folks like you (that would be Yazzer) who are relentless in your hammering to give him a proper shake.   I've said it many times I wish he'd pull the pitchers earlier.  I also have said I cannot fathom why he put two .100+ hitters in the line up at once.   He doesn't get carte blanche, but he does get credit. 
    Posted by SinceYaz[/QUOTE]

    I'ts a lot harder finding someone who will talk about Tito in a balanced way than to see the countless corncob jobs people give him here.

    That is precisely the point. I have given up hoping that Tito will learn how to be a good tactical manager, because it is hard to teach an old dog new tricks, and all I am doing is asking a legitimate question, in a balanced way, for anyone who might want to address it, in a balanced way. (And BTW, anyone who thinks that is trolling is also an old dog who can't be taught new tricks.)

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

    Re: Just curious

    In Response to Re: Just curious:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Just curious : Why wouldn't one blame meeting up against a great pitching performance from the opposing team one day and a reverse of that on the following day? If the entire roster of the opposition has a lights out day on a specific game then why is that the entire blame of our manager? You seem to be illogical, are looking for a simplistic solution ( instead of complex), trying to scapegoat, or else you are just bugging the forum by trolling. Which is it? Yazzer knows and enjoys your effort.
    Posted by PawsoxPhil[/QUOTE]

    Read the post, dude. If you think asking an open ended question is illogical, in search of a simplistic solution, scapegoating, and trolling, I guess the post was not intended for you. 
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from PawsoxPhil. Show PawsoxPhil's posts

    Re: Just curious

    In Response to Re: Just curious:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Just curious : Certainly I concur that a lot of teams go up and down, sometimes one day to the next, but it seems to me the Sox have been shut out alot this year, and I just don't think it's all just whether "the stars are in alignment" that would explain how they could not score a run against Toronto for 11 innings one night, then go nuts offensively the next. There is of course no way to prove it, which is why I asked an open ended question, rather than making a categorical statement, but it does seem to me that the way a manager motivates his team has something to do with such a phenomenon.
    Posted by pschuller[/QUOTE]

    Why wouldn't one blame meeting up against a great pitching performance from the opposing team one day and a reverse of that on the following day? If the entire roster of the opposition has a lights out day on a specific game then why is that the entire blame of our manager? You seem to be illogical, are looking for a simplistic solution ( instead of complex), trying to scapegoat, or else you are just bugging the forum by trolling. Which is it? Yazzer knows and enjoys your effort.

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

    Re: Just curious

    In Response to Just curious:
    [QUOTE]Listen, I fully admit that I am not a fan of Francona and his managing skills, but I just want to ask an open question, mainly out of curiosity, to anyone who might like to throw out an answer: what level of inconsistent performance by the Sox would it take to acknowledge that it MIGHT have something to do with the manager? (Many times this season, including the last 5 games, the Sox have had some big production games interspersed with shutouts/low production games. On the other hand, they have rebounded admirably from their 2-10 start and have had their share of injuries again this year.) I am aware that a number of posters believe that because Francona was the manager when the Sox won in '04 and '07 that gives him a lifetime pass of sorts on all things managerial, but given how the Sox have performed this year, I still think my question is worth pondering.
    Posted by pschuller[/QUOTE]
    As a Tito supporter, I have no problem with this question. The consistency of the bats clearly has been an issue.

    By my count, the Sox have scored 10+ runs 21 times. (The Yankees: 16). On the other hand, they've been shutout or scored 1 run 21 times. (The Yankees: 13).

    Baseball indeed is a marathon and not a sprint, but roughly one-third of the Red Sox's season so far has been one extreme or the other. I can't explain it. But I've never considered it to be the manager's or coach's fault when the players don't perform, especially at the professional level.

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

    Re: Just curious

    Papi on postgame after the 1-0 loss: " Good pitching usually stops good hitting". Could it moght be that the last two games were determined by the quality of the opponent's pitching in each game instead of the inconsistency in the Sox hitting. Why don't some posters look at the forrest instead of a tree. Why the need to place blame on a convenient, illogical target. Why not blame 25 variables instead of one? Why not step back and admit that there are a myriad of reasons as to why specific games are lost?

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

    Re: Just curious

    Anytime your team loses 1-0 its because the other teams pitchers stepped up their game... 
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from pschuller. Show pschuller's posts

    Re: Just curious

    Thanks, LloydDobler, for your thoughtful post. And thanks for throwing out those stats, which do seem to suggest an imbalance in the Sox attack. I am, however, even more curious about your philosopy regarding coaching, and hope you will expand on it for me. (But I've never considered it to be the manager's or coach's fault when the players don't perform, especially at the professional level.)

    When I have coached, I considered the motivation of my players job #1, and though I have never coached professionals, I have played with some, and it never seemed to me that they were so much better than amateurs at motivating themselves. Granted, they ought to be, given that they are getting paid to perform, but I think that when a guy is getting paid and is playing a horrendously long season, as in baseball, there is a tendency to start going through the motions (by contrast, those of us who don't get paid to play our games just stop doing it when it gets too tiresome), making it all the more important for a manager to figure out how to keep them motivated.

    I look forward to hearing your perspective on this.





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

    Re: Just curious

    Here's my 2 Cents on Tito:
    1. I don't think another manager could deal with the Boston media circus with better attitude, better wit, or better overall good will.
    2. He is as good a player-friendly manager as there is in all of baseball.
    3. The players respect him, they did not respect Joe Kerrigan, did not respect Butch Hobson, did not respect Kevin Kennedy (played favorites). I think Jimy and Grady were respected, but one was crazy and the other was very stubborn in his final managerial game with Sox, and played hunches.
    4. Theo and Tito are not only on the same page, they are joined at the hip when it comes to most of the decisions made in pitching rotation, lineups, and who to bring up or bring in to help  the team.
    5. My one true criticism of Tito is he could argue back that he is making the tough choices to keep the team healthy by playoff time--the white flag lineups--when he sits 2 or 3 regulars during even a team slump because he wants them to get a day's rest. He knows that the lineup is probably doomed to fail but he sends it out anyway, which causes a lot of fans great distress. I don't think the SP is too happy when they have a C- lineup. Sometimes those type of lineups are unavoidable--Ortiz, Youks hurt at same time--but he does this about 7 or 8 times  a year, and some could say that's the difference between him and Joe Girardi. 
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Just curious

    I think Tito is the AL Manager of the Year for bringing the team back from 2-10 to a playoff spot. I actually thought they couldn't pull that off, and they did. So I think people need to look at the big picture with Terry. He's a good manager.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: Just curious

    In Response to Re: Just curious:
    [QUOTE]Thanks, LloydDobler, for your thoughtful post. And thanks for throwing out those stats, which do seem to suggest an imbalance in the Sox attack. I am, however, even more curious about your philosopy regarding coaching, and hope you will expand on it for me. ( But I've never considered it to be the manager's or coach's fault when the players don't perform, especially at the professional level.) When I have coached, I considered the motivation of my players job #1, and though I have never coached professionals, I have played with some, and it never seemed to me that they were so much better than amateurs at motivating themselves. Granted, they ought to be, given that they are getting paid to perform, but I think that when a guy is getting paid and is playing a horrendously long season, as in baseball, there is a tendency to start going through the motions (by contrast, those of us who don't get paid to play our games just stop doing it when it gets too tiresome), making it all the more important for a manager to figure out how to keep them motivated. I look forward to hearing your perspective on this.
    Posted by pschuller[/QUOTE]
    I think the coach does motivate at lower levels -- youth leagues, high school, maybe even college. But at the professional level, we're talking about grown men, some well into their 30s. If they need someone to motivate them to play, they're a lost cause.
    I see a manager's job simply that -- as managing the team. Keeping everyone healthy, figuring out the right combinations, and keeping harmony in the clubhouse. Tito is a master at that, in my opinion. I think on-field strategy is often overrated ... in fact, it's usually scripted.
    At least that's my take.




     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from pinstripezac32. Show pinstripezac32's posts

    Re: Just curious

    In Response to Re: Just curious:
    [QUOTE]I think Tito is the AL Manager of the Year for bringing the team back from 2-10 to a playoff spot. I actually thought they couldn't pull that off, and they did. So I think people need to look at the big picture with Terry. He's a good manager.
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]

    I think people need to look at the big picture with Terry. He's a very good manager


    agreed


    Tito is the AL Manager of the Year for bringing the team back from 2-10 to a playoff spot.

    but wasn't he the same mgr who brought them to 2-10 ;-)

    lets see what happens this month

    if he can win the division I'll agree with you

    while it doesn't seem right that he hasn't won MOY yet

    it doesn't seem right that not  winning the div after being so favored

    gets you there either

    IMO could be another one for big mike  in LAA
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share