In response to pumpsie-green's comment:
In response to Joebreidey's comment:
I doubt you remember many of the details either. What I remember is how thorough the analysis was. Many of us thought it was a brilliant post. A majority of those at Sawxheads as I recall agreed with nearly every example he gave us.
Down 2-1 at Toronto, Drew on 1st, 0 outs, Lugo up.
Tchandra wanted Lugo to bunt to play for a tie on the road. On a 3-2 count, Tito sent the runner. Lugo lined into a DP. There isn't any doubt that Tito's play is the norm for managers.
The fact that you and the Sawxheads don't understand that doesn't mean anything.
Do you recall the rest of that brilliant analytical post? I admit that I don't. If you can dig it up, great. What I do remember is that for the vast majority of the instances cited by TChandra, he was spot on. I am glad Tito is gone; I am glad Epstein is gone. And I will be glad when Cheringon, Lucchino, and Valentine are all gone so we can start rebuilding effectively.
Don't bother to dig it up: re-create it.
Up until August 1, the Red sox were 16-16 in 1-run games.
Your premise is that Tito was at fault for losing 15 of those 16 1-run games, unless you think he was costing them multiple runs. So you are basically saying that we should have been 31-1 in one-run games.
Pick out the 15 losses and explain how he lost them.
This should be good for a chuckle.