Francona = Manager of the Year?
by 0157H7 on Oct 4, 2010 8:00 AM EDT
in News
Email
Print
There's a lot to like in Amalie Benjamin's excellent comprehensive look at the 2010 Red Sox team. She correctly fingers not just the plague of injuries but poor defense, bad starts by Beckett and Lackey, and atrocious relief pitching as the cause of Boston's demise. But one remark really stood out in the piece, and it's something that I want to take people's pulse on here:
They did right the ship enough to remain technically in contention until the final week of the season. So, was this Francona’s finest season at the helm of the Sox? Pitching coach John Farrell says, unequivocally, yes.
"Without a doubt,’’ said Farrell. "Because of the adversity that was faced, the ever-changing roster, the ever-changing lineup in a given day, most of them surprises and on very short notice. They’re key guys.’’
Francona should be considered for his first Manager of the Year award, but he will be hard-pressed to overtake the Rangers’ Ron Washington or the Twins’ Ron Gardenhire.
Terry for Manager of the Year... huh? Just because Captain Late Hook didn't hear the tic-tic-ticking of playoff elimination until two weeks before the end of the season doesn't mean things weren't over long beforehand. Frankly, I think there's a tendency in the media to idolize managers, maybe because they're the main contact point for the media, maybe so that they keep giving the beat writers good copy. Tito's a great, standup guy, the Mike Lowell of Managers. But Manager of the Year? In a year where the Red Sox go from perennial contender to completely missing the playoffs?
On the other hand, this season didn't have any real personality explosions in the clubhouse. We didn't have any brawls between players or staff. We didn't have a player knock down an aging traveling secretary. We didn't wonder if our manager would be fired over controversial remarks. Usually Manager of the Year goes to a guy whose team significantly improved over the season, but maybe this year should be an exception. What do you think?
64 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
This poll needs another option:
- No, but he did a great job
I don’t think he deserves Manager of the Year by any stretch, but I do think he deserves credit for doing the best he could with a stinking bag of poo.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
Oh, and there's also this one:
- Who cares? The season is over.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
This poll needs another option: yours is good
and what about a yes or no option keeping the poll a little more objective.
hard to argue with “Serene clubhouse despite injuries, kept guys competing in the face of adversity.” but that may not mean he deserves an award. if he didn’t do this, he probably would be a candidate for replacement.
and the other choice “No way does Francoma, the Greek God of Late Hooks and a Different Lineup Every Nite, get the honor.” could have been shortened to say " i hate tito"
also the “Who cares? The season is over.” is a good neutral choice, kind of like we will see next year
I agree
that it could use another option.
But, given the current options I voted that he should get it. He won’t, though. (If “No, but he did a great job” was an option I would’ve gone with that)
Obvioulsy
Francona is not in contention for the award, but he did a fine job managing this team through a challenging season. Just going into the season, he had new veteran players in left, short and third and a spare veteran in Mike Lowell hanging around. Papi got off to a horrendous start in April, Ellsbury and Cameron got hurt, and that was just the first few weeks.
He may not be the manager of the year, but he is likely the best manager in the history of the Red Sox. Just think about it, who in the modern era (say since 1967 for the Sox) would you want? Butch Hobson?
I think Manager of the Year is a stupid award
not because it’s unimportant or anything, but I think to get a real feel for how a manager is doing, you need to be closely following a team. It’s voted on by writers, who are all mostly either following one team or are following them all very broadly. I know everyone has been saying Ron Washington should have it, but as someone who doesn’t closely follow the Rangers, I don’t know why- they look to me like their usual offense-first team which has a couple of decent pitchers (though I don’t see them as Washington’s doing) who barely managed to scrape out 90 wins in a 4 team division where the next highest team ended with a .500 record. Not exactly a legendary season in my mind. Is it just because everyone was saying he was probably going to get fired after last year and his coke incident? I don’t even see it as the Rangers winning that division so much as the A’s, Angels, and Mariners lost it.
In any case, my point it maybe, maybe not, I’m with Bloggy- who cares? I know that I like Francona a lot. He has and probably will make some dumb decisions (who wouldn’t with that bullpen, though?), but in general I see a team that wins a lot of games even when multiple all stars are off the field. I can’t give Francona credit for that, but I can’t say it’s not because he’s doing something great.
Actually, the "who cares" bit
was a reference to the running gag throughout the year. It’s certainly not that I don’t care.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
It started early.
In my defense, the season was over for Papelbon as a reliable closer.
Wait 'til next/this year?
"Laser show. So relax."
by nuthinboutnuthin on Oct 4, 2010 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Plus, how can you compare managers?
To do it accurately, the performances would have to be closely scrutinized, which is just kinda stupid (too much controversy and differing of opinions on certain matters). And the whole popularity contest thing is stupid too.
"Every night I go to bed thinking about when I’m going to play again. I dream about playing at Fenway."-Ryan Westmoreland
Twitter: @BoldandBrash
Any hook before the eighth makes him an accomplise to arson
I suspect part of the theory was that with as strong as a rotation as the Sox had that the bullpen wouldn’t be that exposed, and they could fix it. Then the rotation wasn’t as good as they thought, the bullpen was worse than they thought, and they they lost the 1,2 and 4 hitters for large chunks of the season. In terms of outperforming expectations I would argue Tito probably did that more than any other manager in the league.
Are you people serious?
I truly believe Francona routinely costs this team 5 wins a year with his terrible line ups and abysmal management of the pitching staff. MotY?
He did the best he could
with the tools he had to work with.
David Ortiz 2010: 120 RBIs, 35+ HRs. Jason who?
Really, 5 games?
First off, fans tend to obsess about line-ups. They really don’t matter as much as some people think, unless you’re talking about personnel decisions such as playing Player A over Player B. As for this year, the line-ups were determined by who was available to play.
Regarding the management of the pitching staff, Francona is as good as any and better than most. Are you aware of how bad the Sox’ pen was? Basically, Boston had one good reliever, a serviceable pitcher, and four Gagnes at any one time (MDC, RamRam, Schoeneweis, Oki, Bowden, Richardson, Nelson, Manuel, etc.). When Bill Hall is one of your best relief options, your team is in trouble.
Do you watch other teams? All managers make moves that fans consider questionable from time-to-time. For the most part, Francona’s moves are rational, which is all you can ask for.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Oct 4, 2010 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions
I really don't see why it's not possible to ask for 100% rational decisions.
This year he didn’t have much to work with, but he’s had good pens in the past and mishandled them dramatically.
USG
I strongly disagree
I know you don’t like Tito, Ben. We’ve had these arguments before. No manager is perfect. Francona’s decisions are rational and he handles his players well, including his pitchers.
Watch other managers closely and you’ll see Tito is better than most. In my opinion, Francona is perfect for this team and is one of the best in the game. He’s easily the best Sox manager in my lifetime. That doesn’t make him perfect. No player, manager, or GM is perfect. Even the best make mistakes.
Who would you rather have as manager?
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Oct 4, 2010 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm of the opinion that Francona isn't really a problem.
I disagree with a good amount of his decisions, but he doesn’t have much influence in the game anyway. IMO, he doesn’t handle the pen well, but I’m not sure that would deter a strong team from a WS (yes I remember Grady). If we named some guy off the street today as the new manager, I wouldn’t have much concern.
"Every night I go to bed thinking about when I’m going to play again. I dream about playing at Fenway."-Ryan Westmoreland
Twitter: @BoldandBrash
No offence, but I think this comment is insane:
If we named some guy off the street today as the new manager, I wouldn’t have much concern.
If you honestly don’t think that there is a valid skill to balancing the egos of 25 (or 40) different players, not to mention the coaching staff, and then handle the questions, comments, and accusations of local, national, and INTERnational media and fans…and then maintain your cool while doing so? You’ve clearly never been put in charge. Or even baby-sat.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
It may have been a little extreme,
but can you prove he balances egos well? How well does he handle the media as compared to what? Even if he couldn’t interact with the media, does that effect the team’s success? Plus, Francona does almost nothing when it comes to on the field stuff. It’s impossible to screw up the lineups. For better or worse, he sits there and makes bullpen decisions. Those aren’t rocket science either.
"Every night I go to bed thinking about when I’m going to play again. I dream about playing at Fenway."-Ryan Westmoreland
Twitter: @BoldandBrash
the off the street thing was more of a metaphor.
"Every night I go to bed thinking about when I’m going to play again. I dream about playing at Fenway."-Ryan Westmoreland
Twitter: @BoldandBrash
Interacting with the media creates pressure.
Pressure causes stress. When people get stressed, they often take it out on other people. Which causes the negativity to spread.
That would negatively impact the team’s success.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
fair enough
It’s possible but not necessarily going to happen. You can’t prove that there is or isn’t negativity, so I can’t worry about that when evaluating managers.
"Every night I go to bed thinking about when I’m going to play again. I dream about playing at Fenway."-Ryan Westmoreland
Twitter: @BoldandBrash
Here's my problem with your argument
Based on your logic, you can’t “prove” the intangible qualities of a manager because there is no way to quantify them. Interacting with the media, managing clubhouse moral, etc, are all things that cannot be proven. Which I don’t necessarily disagree with. But…
Can you quantify all of the negatives that you pin on Tito? For instance, a “negative” call to the bullpen. If a RP comes in and then gives up a HR, can you prove that Tito made the wrong move? What if the pitcher strikes out the first hitter and then gives up a HR? Did Tito leave him in too long?
What about lineups? Can you prove that having Bill Hall start a game is the reason we lost? We all would probably say he lost it for us, but can you actually prove that this was Tito’s fault?
Before anyone jumps down my throat, please know I’m just playing devil’s advocate here. Granted, there should be accountability and I think we all would agree that Tito has made questionable calls before. But if all we can do is speculate his intangible qualifications (based on our limited perspectives as fans), his decision making skills may also be the basis of speculation. If you’re going to dismiss many of his positive qualities because they cannot be quantified, I think that will always skew your viewpoint.
I'm not trying to say that his decisions are wrong.
I’m trying to say that I’m not a huge fan of his bullpen and bunt decisions.For the lineups: it’s impossible to screw those up too much, even with injuries. I may have been critical of him earlier this season, but that was mostly out of frustration. As said in my comment below: There’s no way to know if option B would have worked better than option A.
"Every night I go to bed thinking about when I’m going to play again. I dream about playing at Fenway."-Ryan Westmoreland
Twitter: @BoldandBrash
I guess here's where me and the SABR-tooths will always butt heads.
Based on your logic, you can’t "prove" the intangible qualities of a manager because there is no way to quantify them. Interacting with the media, managing clubhouse moral, etc, are all things that cannot be proven.
It’s impossible to put a number on that, yes. Since it’s impossible, I feel that a lot of sabermatricians devalue the importance.
Yet, it is generally accepted that people-management is a skill. And it is generally accepted that a bad work environment most often creates a less-productive work environment. “A happy employee is a productive employee”.
As such, it is not so really that much of an illogical stretch to assume that adding in testosterone, a hyper-competitive atmosphere, prima donna attitidudes, constant public scrutiny, raging egos, ’locker room mentality", millionaires complaining at you from above and below, and more creates an environment which takes a very special personality.
There’s not a number or an acronym for it, no. But it’s important nonetheless.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
I've accepted, for the most part, that in the past Francona's ego-management might have been vital
With guys like Manny, Papelbon, and Beckett being the “big 3” in 2007, lots can go wrong. But do we really need that now, or can we sacrifice some of that for better bullpen management?
Now, I don’t know how Francona’s pen decisions, lineups, et. al. compare to the rest of the league’s, and if he’s above average, then my criticism is more with the standards of the role than Tito himself. But consider our team now. Papelbon may be non-tendered. Anything Beckett gives us is just a bonus, basically. And Manny is gone as the primary offensive player for guys who for the most part police themselves in the rare case it’s needed. Pedroia, Youkilis, Papi, etc. don’t exactly need babysitting.
I just don’t think that a clubhouse manager is what the team needs right now.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Oct 5, 2010 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions
But clubhouse management isn't just about the big egos
Things like playing time issues and sticking with players through struggles are also important. I think of guys like Colby Rasmus on the Cardinals and his “feud” with LaRussa (which might have been media-fueled, but whatever). The point is that just because there are less egos in the clubhouse doesn’t mean that there isn’t any need for a good clubhouse manager.
Look at the situations of Lowell and Big Papi this year. Yes, we all know that both of those players are class acts and they handled themselves well. But I have to think Francona played a part in keeping them as positive influences. It might not be THE most important factor, but it definitely makes a difference.
Not to mention, the way Francona handles the Boston media is almost always impeccable.
I think my biggest problem with Tito
is not picking the right reliever to handle a late inning situation, but getting the most out of the relievers..
Two relievers, who perform badly for the Sox, are now on Playoff team with an incredible month of pitching. RamRam and Javy Lopez, yes that Javy Lopez. RamRam is living up to his potential with the Giants, and Lopez is putting up pretty good numbers..
I think a good manager get the most out of his players, and obviously something is wrong when players with potential fall flat like Oki and RamRam during his season with the Sox. Tito either has to change some of his skill, or talk to John Farrell or Gary Tuck, or Gary Tuck should be let go.
Yes the bullpen had lots of duds, but I also think there has been a bad job in getting the most out of the duds this year, from Daisuke to Josh Beckett.
I am curious how Daisuke will do in Seattle next year, (my guess of where he will land in the off season.)
I think this says less about Tito and more about the reliability/predictability of relievers.
How would you have used Ramon Ramirez differently? He looked like toast to me.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
Exactly
Also, sample size is important. RamRam pitched 42.2 innings for Boston and only 27 for San Francisco. J-Lo only threw 19 innings for the Giants this year.
Let’s look at RamRam’s numbers this year:
Bos – 6.59 K/9 3.40 BB/9 .272 BABIP
SF – 5.00 K/9 3.67 BB/9 .164 BABIP
Hmm, in SF his K-rate and BB-rate were worse than they were in Boston, yet he was more successful largely because of BABIP.
Looking at his pitch profiles, his velocity was pretty much the same on all of his pitches. The only difference was he relied on his change a bit more in the N (20% in SF, compared to 17.5% in Bos). This can’t account for his results in the NL because his change isn’t very good (it’s only 5 MPH slower than his fastball). I can only think of two reasons why Ram Ram’s results were so good with the Giants and none have to do with Francona: LUCK and the fact that AL offenses are better than NL offenses.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Oct 8, 2010 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Just because there's less of the overt PERSONALITIES that there was in the past
especially Manny, doesn’t mean there aren’t a lot of strong personalities that need to be balanced in a clubhouse. The ability to deal with multiple personality types (from differing cultures, even) is always an asset and should never be understated.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
I 100% agree
And I think that was my point. That just because something isn’t quantifiable, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. If you are going to insist on judging a manager by his “tangible” qualities alone, you are then going to instantly dismiss a lot of attributes that do, in fact, matter.
I actually was trying to respond to B&B and clicked the wrong button.
But, yeah. We’re essentially saying the same thing.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
I'm not saying they don't exist.
It’s just that I can’t know about them. Maybe there was actually tension in the 07 clubhouse that was overshadowed because they still won the ship. Francona may be the best people person ever, but how can anybody know except for the players and maybe ownership. Even then, how are they going to know? Poll the players? Players come and go, so one guy thinks he’s great, the other hates him. Because I can’t know about these qualities, I can’t say if he’s good or bad. I’m not gonna say he’s good because everyone else does.
"Every night I go to bed thinking about when I’m going to play again. I dream about playing at Fenway."-Ryan Westmoreland
Twitter: @BoldandBrash
But if you don't know...
How can you say whether or not he’s qualified to do the job? I’m not saying we should all walk blindly as fans of the team, accepting all and questioning none. But from the most technical (and extreme) of standpoints, none of us really know anything unless we’re inside the organization.
So we can either believe what Sox insiders say (and most Sox players, writers, and execs all say that Tito is an outstanding leader and clubhouse manager) and then weigh those factors about what we do see on the field. OR, we have to disregard it all, throw our hands up in the air, and say, “I don’t know what’s best.” You can’t have it both ways. You can’t believe the on field stuff because you see it, and then discount the off field stuff because you don’t see it. That’s illogical, in my opinion.
(And by “you,” I don’t necessarily mean you specifically. More of like a general you).
No offence, but I think this comment is insane:
If you honestly don’t think that there is a valid skill to balancing the egos of 25 (or 40) different players,
"No offence, but I think this comment is insane:
If you honestly don’t think that there is a valid skill to balancing the egos of 25 (or 40) different players"
sounds like a job description for a manager at mcdonalds.
for torrie and geraldi they can be replaced by a bingo ball puller. just put names instead of numbers in a hat and pick.
the hardest part about a mlb managers jobs is not getting caught on tv scratching your nuts
I think this is a good
question. But I can say that watching other managers it is impossible to make what retroactively seem like rational decisions 100% of the time. No doubt Francona has made incorrect pen decisions (and decisions about who to play in L/R pitching/hitting matchups). The pen decisions, however, have to be made in real time very quickly, and include getting a pitcher up and warming (or not), estimating who that pitcher willf ace and who the backup plans or next inning pitcher will then face. Thus part of it is a guessing game based on a risk analysis that extends even beyond the game to the next game and out. Further, when dealing with as bad a pen as we had this year, a lot of what look like bad decisions really amount to retroactively examining the implosion that came from a “pick your poison” type decision. If you look at leverage based decisions Francona excelled in using Bard when he had too, Papelbon next, etc. That is Bard was actually used in the more important situations, and then so on down the line. I have watched a lot of other managers (Torre and Girardi a lot because I live in NYC, Maddon (about 30 times a year), Sciocia, etc). They all make a far bit more head scratching decisions than Tito does. This is true even for Girardi and Maddon who had much better pens to deal with. Those guys mix and match in totally silly ways. I think we have to either believe that there are no good managers or that it is harder than it looks on TV.
the line ups should be based on stats, and experience of the hitter in that games situation
hitter may hit lefty’s better, has good lifetime numbers vs a certain pitcher, in a certain park, etc.
i think the sox tend to utilize the stats approach – unless you have a crystal ball, you can’t do any better than that night in and night out.
Yes...
and the other issue with the pen and lineup is that Francona has info we don’t. He’s looking at stats we don’t see, yes, but beyond that he’s talking to the guys and seeing them every day. He knows who is sore, who is worn down, etc… and he gets extra info on how guys in the pen are feeling/throwing from coaches… This is true of all managers, which is why I think unless its a really boneheaded move (leaving Pedro in after 100 pitches) you should give the manager the benefit of the doubt.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
Leaving Beckett in in Game 2 of the ALCS in 2008
That’s Terry’s “Grady” moment. Doesn’t get enough heat for that at all.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Oct 5, 2010 10:17 AM EDT up reply actions
That was bad
1)Had a 2-0 lead for the taking.
2)Could empty the pen (travel day ahead).
But unlike Grady he was not 5 outs away from the WS. The process was as poor, however.
No way.
Best manager we’ve ever had.
Love how I keep hearing people with no f***ing concept of the big picture knocking Francona for making the “wrong” micro-management choices with the lineup and pen down the stretch of a season that didn’t matter AT ALL – and the decisions were basically coin flips anyway.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
+1
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Oct 4, 2010 1:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah
There’s no way to know if option B would have worked better than option A. Plus, opinions just differ. Just don’t base his quality off of team success because there’s little correlation (not saying that you do that).
"Every night I go to bed thinking about when I’m going to play again. I dream about playing at Fenway."-Ryan Westmoreland
Twitter: @BoldandBrash
5 wins? how does that compare to replacement?
how did you come up with that number?
boogar cost the sox 5 games
Doesn't Francona get to decide who's on the coaching staff?
And what roles they fill? So if he puts Bogar on third, then he’s “cost the Sox five games” by proxy.
"If your happiness depends on Boston winning or losing, you have to get a life." Manny Somebody-or-other
Being a Red Sox fan is an emotional commitment; being a Yankees fan is a character flaw.
with this proxy logic
that means he lost 73 games, which means he lost less than 2/3 of the other managers.
didn’t know we were calculating this by proxy. losing 73 games a year because of tito.
don’t fire him, shoot him or proxy him to death.
everyone on the red sox management team is a rep of the owner, therefore everyone is guilty by proxy; for hiring tito; for hiring the guy who hired the guy who hired tito; for hiring the guy who hired the guy who hired the guy …………….
just mess’n, little snarky today
No worries.
I recognize snark when I see it. ;-)
The proxy stuff was just my contribution to what I see as the absurdity of the whole MoY question. As others have discussed above, without knowing exactly what goes on in the clubhouse, we can’t really evaluate Tito’s management thereof. After on-field success, what criteria can we use? Lack of clubhouse drama, media relations, emotional stability, inspiring the team… those are kind of hard to quantify, much less compare league-wide.
"If your happiness depends on Boston winning or losing, you have to get a life." Manny Somebody-or-other
Being a Red Sox fan is an emotional commitment; being a Yankees fan is a character flaw.
by Tessie's Dad on Oct 6, 2010 12:45 AM EDT up reply actions
Nope
Bring in Bard.
"That place was for diehard sports fans. I only follow my team when they're in the playoffs" - Homer Simpson
Join the Lacrosse community The Lacrosse Blog
by bestbostonsports on Oct 4, 2010 1:00 PM EDT reply actions
"Amalie Benjamin's excellent" 2010 assessment
mediocre, at best.
i see much better by folks on this blog.
she is a very good reporter
but as an analyst – i’ll stick with the nation’s.
Awwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww, man!
How do I go in and change my vote?? I can’t even vote for the one that has my @#$%ing name on it!!!
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
Manager of the year?
I’m going to repeat what alot of people just did and then some. When every other Sox fan I’ve talked to (and there have been hundreds) says the same thing about his ability to manage a pitching staff I think there might be something to that concern. I know he’s not the one out there on the mound, but he is the one making the call to the pen. And when you keep making the same stupid moves in August and September (letting Dice K pitch to Crawford with runners in scoring position after he had hit consecutive RBI doubles and then he gives up a third RBI double to put the game out of reach; or putting in Okijima in the 10th at Yankee Stadium after Paps blew the save) you have to wonder about his competency in that particular area. Quite frankly, if we are blowing games late in the season because of obviously stupd moves like that I would seriously be calling for his job at the end of 2011.
The problem with your argument is
“Who else is there?”
When every bullpen move that doesn’t rhyme with “chard” is a bad bullpen move…what do you do? You leave a guy in too long. Or, isn’t it you pull him too soon and you put in a shitty reliever?
It’s no-win.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
by Bloggy on Oct 5, 2010 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
tru dat
also, he made 89 correct decisions during the course of the season – 5th highest in american league – despite a snafu of a season
75rockband: tito is in charge of a large portion of the red sox inc – $170 million of it. if he sucks why would you wait until 2011 to be “seriously be calling for his job” , when his salary is relatively miniscue?
I was talking about late in the season
If you want to win or lose in the post season you have to get their first. And if that means going in there with tired arms then so be it. You do what you have to . Theo didn’t help too much at the trade deadline either.
but tired arm's are not GOOD arms
when there is one good, reliable reliever in the pen, either someone has to go in or the starter has to stay in longer than you’d like. Unfortunately, Bard just can’t pitch 2-3 innings every game.
+1
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Oct 5, 2010 6:29 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't see how anyone else would be more successful than Francona
Considering the injuries this team had it’s amazing they still ended up with the 5th best record in the AL. I’m not saying he was manager of the year, but he’s pretty good at his job. What manager out there doesn’t make bad decisions and if they exist how are you going to get them?
tito
Tito should be in strong consideration with the injurys to his top players, he did well. He has won more world series, and playoff games, than any other manager since he has been with the Sox. Not a bad resume
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Livan Hernandez welcomes ballboy to the bigs with shower of sunflower seeds (VIDEO)
- Man beaten by four others in Dodger Stadium parking lot
- Lance Berkman’s knee injury creates a lot of questions for Cards but also his career
- Next generation: Scott Van Slyke, son of Andy Van Slyke, hits first career homer
- The Juice: Stephen Strasburg homers to cool off Orioles, Aroldis Chapman closes out Yanks
