Farrell is the manager in 2016

[Lose Remerswaal]

New President of Baseball Operations is Dave Dombrowski
 
New General Manager is Mike Hazen
 
What happens with the Field Manager position?  From all we've read, Farrell's treatment should be over well before spring training.  Lovullo has seemingly done a better job with this team than Farrell did this season, but there are lots of possible reasons for that beyond "he's a better manager than Farrell".  Does Dombrowski (or Hazen) have their own 3rd party they might want to install in the role?
 
Can a manager lose his job when he's out sick?  Would the Sox risk the bad publicity by letting Farrell go while he's recovering from cancer?  Should the Sox promote Farrell instead to give Lovullo the job without the bad pub of firing Farrell?  Do the Sox just put Farrell back in the role and risk losing Lovullo to another team that requests the chance to interview him?  He was already being discussed as managerial fodder prior to taking over from Farrell and there will be demand based on his results with the Sox so far.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

John Farrell. I think the current players rally around him even more knowing that he beat Lymphoma as much as they did when he came back the first time. Plus he has one year left, so why change now? Unless of course he just wants a front office job for a year.

It doesn't matter all that much regardless unless the Sox get pitching.

 

[tomdeplonty]

Just guessing. Lovullo and the players who will make up the core of next season's team seem to have a good chemistry. Why mess with it? So Lovullo will become the manager. Farrell will be promoted to the front office - where by all accounts he was headed at some point in his career anyway. He also might welcome something less grueling and travel-intensive after cancer treatment, and the FO gets the manager they want without the bad press that would accompany firing Farrell. It seems to work out well all around.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Hazen and Farrell both worked in the Indians front office before coming to the Red Sox (Hazen directly under Farrell, I believe).  I'm in the camp of "promoting" Farrell in order to promote Lovullo.  Maybe involve Farrell with Brian Bannister and the new pitching development department.  If in a year Farrell wants a field managing job again, he can quietly slip back out on the market and see what interest there is.
 
The hard sell in any situation that doesn't involve Farrell staying in the dugout is probably to the players.  Farrell seems to have a lot of support in the clubhouse, particularly from his veterans (Ortiz, Pedroia, etc).  While I think they'll play for Lovullo, they won't stand for any perceived mistreatment of Farrell.

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

Because so much of the skillset that makes a good manager remains out of the view of the public it's really difficult to make any kind of evaluation of Lovullo at this stage. Of the obvious stuff - lineups, running the pitching staff, game strategy he seems like just a guy .. Hasn't really done anything demonstrably dumb as yet .. given that it hasn't really mattered anyways. Is he really such a star in waiting that they would want to jettison Farrell in his favour?

Given the organization's stated admiration for Farrell I have to think he'll be back.

 

[rembrat]

John Farrell. I think the current players rally around him even more knowing that he beat Lymphoma as much as they did when he came back the first time. Plus he has one year left, so why change now? Unless of course he just wants a front office job for a year.

It doesn't matter all that much regardless unless the Sox get pitching.

 
He is signed through 2017 with a club option for 2018.

 

[Montana Fan]

I like the idea of Lovullo as manager with a Farrell move to the FO. Look at Brian Bannister's new position. Dombrowski will create a position if needed and it will be easy because Farrell has a lot to offer.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

 
He is signed through 2017 with a club option for 2018.

My mistake. Read that it was through 2016 and options in 2017 and 2018.

 

[Rovin Romine]

I voted Lovullo.  
 
I suppose it depends on Farrell's autonomy.  If he's just a field manager, he's an OK-ish manager who's been dealt some bad hands.  However, I don't think he's ever shown that he can intelligently squeeze marginal wins out of a team.  His biggest possible asset are his so-called 'intangibles,' and I'm willing to concede he may be better than average at smoothing egos, talking to the press, and implementing a larger plan.  I'm just very unsure those sort of things translate to a net positive for the club in terms of the standings.  (Even in 2013, the club never seemed more than the sum of it's parts - it just seemed like individual guys had insane peak seasons, and if Farrell "put guys in a position to succeed" in 2013, he didn't manage the same trick in 2014 or 2015).  
 
If he had a lot of organizational authority - input on players, FA's, who to call up and who to leave/send down, etc., he should be gracefully moved into something more in keeping with his skill set.   

 

[derekson]

It could be Lovullo or a new hire, but it won't be Farrell. As others have said, they'll use the cancer treatment and recovery as a reason to say he shouldn't have to deal with the grueling day-to-day of managing and traveling with the team. He'll be moved to some kind of position in PD or a "special assistant to the GM" or something. I suspect Lovullo will get an interview along with several other candidates, but I won't even begin to guess who else is up for the job or if Lovullo gets the job.

 

[YTF]

Not suggesting this would or should happen, but I'm curious as to what Dombrowski's relationship was with Brad Ausmus before they both left Detroit.
 
Premature with Ausmus' departure, but speculation is that he may be gone

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

Not suggesting this would or should happen, but I'm curious as to what Dombrowski's relationship was with Brad Ausmus before they both left Detroit.
 
Premature with Ausmus' departure, but speculation is that he may be gone

From what I saw of Ausmus I would not be happy with him managing the Red Sox.

IMO, Farrell is an upper echelon manager .. If they are replacing him they better be bringing in someone really good.

 

[Clears Cleaver]

Brad Ausmus. dombrowski hired him in Detroit, he interviewed for the Boston job already, so you know ownership likes him. He grew up in CT a Sox fan...
 
I think Brad takes a year off or goes to SD in some capacity where his family is located, but if its someone not named Louvello or Farrell, he'd be the guy

 

[Saints Rest]

It could be Lovullo or a new hire, but it won't be Farrell. As others have said, they'll use the cancer treatment and recovery as a reason to say he shouldn't have to deal with the grueling day-to-day of managing and traveling with the team. He'll be moved to some kind of position in PD or a "special assistant to the GM" or something. I suspect Lovullo will get an interview along with several other candidates, but I won't even begin to guess who else is up for the job or if Lovullo gets the job.

I agree with this pretty much 100%.  My one slight difference is that I think Lovullo is about a 25% chance to return.  
 
I think, as others have noted, it is unlikely that DD/Hazen will make any changes to the positional side of the roster, so they (i.e. DD/MH) may feel the need to exert their stamp on the team in the most obvious way, a new manager.  

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

From what I saw of Ausmus I would not be happy with him managing the Red Sox.

IMO, Farrell is an upper echelon manager .. If they are replacing him they better be bringing in someone really good.

Just curious about how much you've seen of both, other than standings? I haven't seen enough of Ausmus to say either way, but I've seen plenty enough of Farrell to be confident in saying he is not only *not an "upper echelon" manager, but it's more likely he is in the bottom third of the league.

He's great with the media and seems to handle egos well, but the man is a terrible in game manager. As others have stated, he brings no marginal wins and he quite likely costs them a few games a year with his moves. That he ran into a World Series ring doesn't mean he's upper echelon and there's nothing else on his resume between Toronto and Boston that would even hint at him garnering that kind of rating.

 

[kieckeredinthehead]

Managers have to make decisions at a bunch of different temporal scales - inning to inning, day to day, over the course of the season, even across seasons. One of the things that I feel doesn't get enough play is the week to two week time frame and how managers deal with it. Things have a tendency to escalate on teams at that scale. You lost three in a row, suddenly you're pressing to win the next one and you put the bullpen early, they blow it and then they're unavailable for a few days and the losing streak continues. Hitters start collectively pressing. Tito and Farrell, I think, are at the opposite ends of the spectrum at running the team at this scale. Farrell's teams have had a bunch of long losing streaks - more than would be expected from their record. Those losing streaks really ended up hurting this year, especially the one after the all star break. A few more wins and maybe we trade for a starter or bullpen guy and this team is competing for the postseason.

 

[AB in DC]

I'm not a big Farrell fan, but I don't see Hazen getting rid of him any time soon.  The two of them have a working relationship dating back to 2004, with two different teams.  I highly doubt that's a coincidence.
 
Unless it's a mutual decision, Farrell stays for at least one more year.

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

Just curious about how much you've seen of both, other than standings? I haven't seen enough of Ausmus to say either way, but I've seen plenty enough of Farrell to be confident in saying he is not only *not an "upper echelon" manager, but it's more likely he is in the bottom third of the league.
He's great with the media and seems to handle egos well, but the man is a terrible in game manager. As others have stated, he brings no marginal wins and he quite likely costs them a few games a year with his moves. That he ran into a World Series ring doesn't mean he's upper echelon and there's nothing else on his resume between Toronto and Boston that would even hint at him garnering that kind of rating.

The main problem in evaluating managers seems to be really an argument over the relative importantance of the various aspects of the job.

I think a managers job can be broken down into the following main categories - and the order of their importance

Leadership
Handling a pitching staff
Media relations
In game tactics

We all agree that Farrell is not particularly good at #4 .. But I don't think it's really a big deal compared to the stuff he IS good at.

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

The main problem in evaluating managers seems to be really an argument over the relative importantance of the various aspects of the job.

I think a managers job can be broken down into the following main categories - and the order of their importance

Leadership
Handling a pitching staff
Media relations
In game tactics

We all agree that Farrell is not particularly good at #4 .. But I don't think it's really a big deal compared to the stuff he IS good at.

Farrell's teams, both in Toronto and in Boston, may fairly be critcized for overall sloppy fundamentals and poor baserunning. Does that fall on "leadership" as you group things?

And what criteria is used to evaluate performance in "handling a pitching staff" when bullpen decisions fall under "in game tactics" instead? If you use pitching performance metrics, Farrell doesn't look elite there, either.

Farrell's now has several years of team underperformance bookending both sides of one spectacular year where the players rallied themselves to stand against a horrible act of terrorism.

It doesn't mean that Farrell's a bad guy, or that he wouldn't excel in a FO advisory role. But at the end of the day, it's a results-driven business.

 

[Al Zarilla]

The main problem in evaluating managers seems to be really an argument over the relative importantance of the various aspects of the job.

I think a managers job can be broken down into the following main categories - and the order of their importance

Leadership
Handling a pitching staff
Media relations
In game tactics

We all agree that Farrell is not particularly good at #4 .. But I don't think it's really a big deal compared to the stuff he IS good at.

I know it's Boston, but media relations ahead of in game tactics/management? How about Belichick? I know football has a ton more room for scheming genius, before and during games, and maniacal preparation than baseball, but  if BB is bottom 20% among his peers for media relations, I couldn't care less.

 

[mwonow]

I just read that Craig Breslow is starting today's game, and dropped in to cast what amounts to a "not Luvello" vote. Unless the FO is insisting on this, it's a pretty mystifying call...

 

[Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat]

I just read that Craig Breslow is starting today's game, and dropped in to cast what amounts to a "not Luvello" vote. Unless the FO is insisting on this, it's a pretty mystifying call...

It's a bullpen game.  Which one of them starts is largely irrelevant.  They're all pitching.
 
It's mystifying that someone finds this mystifying.

 

[soxhop411]

@Chris_Iott: Brad Ausmus back next season.

 

[richgedman'sghost]

I just read that Craig Breslow is starting today's game, and dropped in to cast what amounts to a "not Luvello" vote. Unless the FO is insisting on this, it's a pretty mystifying call...

I dont know why you found it mystifying..Due to the innings limits on Erod and Owens and other assorted injuries eg...Kelly Wright and Clay, the Red Sox were short on pitchers..Who do suggest should have started? Use your brain and come up with a possible suggestion if you are going to post. ..

 

[richgedman'sghost]

Ps..After Breslow's 4 shutout innings today are you still complaining?

 

[bosockboy]

I think Lovullo is the considerable favorite, but wouldn't rule out Tek.

 

[Al Zarilla]

I think Lovullo is the considerable favorite, but wouldn't rule out Tek.

Mike Matheny had no prior managing experience and he's worked out very well (although we beat his ass in 2013!). Tek would be as exact a parallel as you could get, being a catcher even. Does Tek have aspirations though?

 

[teddywingman]

Farrell is quite possibly the worst in-game manager I have ever seen.

How is it that so many of you haven't noticed? Or is it just the tired theory that in game decisions don't matter much in baseball?

 

[Rasputin]

Farrell is quite possibly the worst in-game manager I have ever seen.

How is it that so many of you haven't noticed? Or is it just the tired theory that in game decisions don't matter much in baseball?

 
How short a memory do you have?
 
Torey Lovullo
John Farrell
Bobby Valentine
Terry Francona
Grady Little
Jimy Williams
Joe Kerrigan
Kevin Kennedy
Butch Hobson
Joe Morgan
John MacNamara
 
And John Farrell is the one you call the worst in game manager you have ever seen. That statement rather suggests that he's the only manager you have ever seen.
 
Mind you, I don't think Farrell is a particularly strong in game manager. I think Playoff Tito is the best in game manager on the list. I'm not even sure Farrell is in the bottom five. MacNamara was terrible. Hobson was worse. Jimy Williams was indistinguishable from someone trying to lose games on purpose. Kennedy was way too much in love with high pitch counts. 
 
As for who's going to be the manager on opening day, I am largely ambivalent. I think it could very well be Farrell or Lovullo. If it's not, I'd like to see Bud Black get a good look. I haven't seen a lot of him what with him being in the west coast on an NL team, but everything I've seen suggests he's pretty good.

 

[BestGameEvah]

Farrell has been very much involved since his diagnosis.  From treatment to ballpark, sitting in on many meetings and staying current.
I think he and Torey stay right where they are for 2016.  

 

[tims4wins]

I don't see why Lovullo couldn't be the Zimmer to John Farrell's Joe Torre - unless he wants to leave for a permanent managing job

 

[reggiecleveland]

Well for one thing he is doing the Zimmer thing backwards. To be Zimmer he should find a way to lose with a great team. He has found a way to win with a last place team.

 

[InsideTheParker]

I dont know why you found it mystifying..Due to the innings limits on Erod and Owens and other assorted injuries eg...Kelly Wright and Clay, the Red Sox were short on pitchers..Who do suggest should have started? Use your brain and come up with a possible suggestion if you are going to post. ..

And learn how to spell Lovullo. . . . (in response to this
 

 I just read that Craig Breslow is starting today's game, and dropped in to cast what amounts to a "not Luvello" vote. Unless the FO is insisting on this, it's a pretty mystifying call...
 
 

from mwonow.

 

[teddywingman]

 
How short a memory do you have?
 
Torey Lovullo
John Farrell
Bobby Valentine
Terry Francona
Grady Little
Jimy Williams
Joe Kerrigan
Kevin Kennedy
Butch Hobson
Joe Morgan
John MacNamara
 
And John Farrell is the one you call the worst in game manager you have ever seen. That statement rather suggests that he's the only manager you have ever seen.
 
Mind you, I don't think Farrell is a particularly strong in game manager. I think Playoff Tito is the best in game manager on the list. I'm not even sure Farrell is in the bottom five. MacNamara was terrible. Hobson was worse. Jimy Williams was indistinguishable from someone trying to lose games on purpose. Kennedy was way too much in love with high pitch counts. 
 
As for who's going to be the manager on opening day, I am largely ambivalent. I think it could very well be Farrell or Lovullo. If it's not, I'd like to see Bud Black get a good look. I haven't seen a lot of him what with him being in the west coast on an NL team, but everything I've seen suggests he's pretty good.

I've been watching since McNamara, and I absolutely believe Farrell is that bad.

Workman's first MLB at bat says hello.

 

[lexrageorge]

I've been watching since McNamara, and I absolutely believe Farrell is that bad.

Workman's first MLB at bat says hello.

Focusing on one event, no matter how infuriating, is not the best way to evaluate a manager's in-game decisions.  For each Farrell blunder, I seem to recall 5 blunders by Valentine and at least 50 by Butchy boy Hobson.  
 
The 2016 manager should either be Farrell or Lovullo, unless Mike Hazen had a real problem with working with either one while he was the assistant GM.  

 

[Rovin Romine]

Focusing on one event, no matter how infuriating, is not the best way to evaluate a manager's in-game decisions.  For each Farrell blunder, I seem to recall 5 blunders by Valentine and at least 50 by Butchy boy Hobson.  
 
The 2016 manager should either be Farrell or Lovullo, unless Mike Hazen had a real problem with working with either one while he was the assistant GM.  

 
Sometimes all we need is one bad decision to show that the manager under consideration should never be allowed to make any decisions going forward (Grady Little).  
 
Farrell's decisions ought to be evaluated in context.  His inability to manage in-game is suspect given contemporary understandings of probable outcomes, high/low leverage, etc. He's had five years to get better at in-game and he still is problematic, in the sense that he's out managed by his contemporaries, and does not always put his team in the best position to win.  Stacking him up against 1980s/90s managers is a bit apples and oranges.   So the issue really is - can he be replaced with someone better, right now?

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Workman's first MLB at bat says hello.

 
I think that's a good example of why it's so problematic to judge managers on in-game decisions. There were a million factors contributing to that decision, but most obviously, the shadow of Buchholz starting the next day when you know he won't be able to go long and you've already used a lot of your bullpen today. The only real hitter you have left on your bench is Napoli, and the two things he does best--walk and go deep--are two things that Rosenthal, at Busch, is extremely unlikely to allow. The argument that it's best to save Napoli to hit against a weaker pitcher in extras might have been weak; the argument that you want to get as many outs as you can out of Workman given the depleted bullpen and the likelihood of extra innings might also have been weak; but together they amounted to a defensible decision, I think. And if Salty doesn't make a shitty throw to third base, and the heart of our order manages to score against whoever the Cards threw out there (presumably Axford), and Koji is able to pitch the 10th, Farrell looks like a genius. That's a lot of ifs, but there are always a lot of ifs.
 
While there are some decisions that are obvious head-scratchers, I don't think there are as many of them as a lot of folks around here suggest (I mean for any manager, not just Farrell). 

 

[teddywingman]

The Workman AB is just one example out of many. And while Hillbilly's defense seems plausible, let's not forget that JF put himself into that situation.

The point is that Farrell always seems to be putting himself and the team into situations.

What was the team's record under Lovullo?

Obviously there are dozens of factors: the kids 'figuring it out' etc; but I don't think the manager's role is negligible.

 

[BestGameEvah]

First time I've heard this:
 
Still, several sources indicated that Farrell will return, health permitting. Two baseball sources confirmed that Farrell has been told as much, while another source revealed that president of baseball operations Dave Dombrowski, in his first address to the staff in mid-August, said Farrell's job would be waiting for him next spring.
 
 http://www.csnne.com/boston-red-sox/If-healthy-john-farrell-will-return-as-boston-red-sox-manager

 

[JimD]

The decision should be Farrell's.  Regardless of whether you like his performance or not, no one should lose their position because they had to go for cancer treatment.

 

[gryoung]

What else can the Sox do, really? Can you imagine the reaction if they announced that either the position was being evaluated or that Lovullo would be manager in 2016? It would be seismic and deservedly so.

They are in a tough spot, especially if Lovullo is the guy they want managing next year.

I believe Lovullo will manage the team in 2016 and Farrell will be in a front office role, but there is lots of time before Spring Training begins.

 

[jasail]

The decision should be Farrell's.  Regardless of whether you like his performance or not, no one should lose their position because they had to go for cancer treatment.

I don't disagree that the decision should be John's. However, John was well on his way to losing the job prior to his diagnosis. With the in-season house cleaning, it's likely that had he not been diagnosed he would have been fired. Now, even with the Sox 2nd half surge under Torrey, the optics are such that they can't move on from him.

If I was in charge, I would give him an option of managing or having a FO position. That would be his decision to make based on health. If he chose to manage, I'd give him enough rope to hang himself with and have an in house replacement plan ready.

 

[genivive]

The problem with this is that Louvello will be in demand with other clubs. Can you keep him and Farrell?

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

The problem with this is that Louvello will be in demand with other clubs. Can you keep him and Farrell?

 
Only if you bump Farrell to the front office.  There's no way to prevent Lovullo from leaving unless they remove interim from his title and make him the manager.  If he's still the bench coach filling in for the manager, the team can't really stand in the way of him taking a managerial job somewhere else.

 

[genivive]

That's my point, we can't have both. Right now isn't Tori the better choice?

 

[Yossarian]

Keep in mind that while he's certainly been impressive, there's no guarantee that if the Sox make Lovullo available he'll even get a managerial job.  He probably will, but it's not a lock.  It's not inconceivable that he could come back as Farrell's bench coach even if he does interview with other teams.

 

[MuzzyField]

First, Fuck Cancer, Cancer Sucks... BUT
 
This should be about what's best for the 2016 Red Sox... period.
 
I'm pretty sure JF knew he was toast as manager before his diagnosis.
 
His non-2013 performance as a major league manager is one of the reasons DD is now the running the show. I'm sure DD was hired based on a plan that included a manager of his choosing and that's the plan that should be followed. This isn't a Hazen decision. 
 
If DD doesn't believe JF is the best choice to manage the Sox in 2016, so be it. I don't think he does. 
 
JF signed an extension and will be WELL paid wether he's in the dugout, accepts a position in the front office, or leaves the organization.
 
I'll save my outrage for those that lose their job and truly get "screwed"... this isn't going to be one of those situations. 

 

[rembrat]

The problem with this is that Louvello will be in demand with other clubs. Can you keep him and Farrell?

 
Why is Lovullo suddenly in demand and why do we care if we lose him?

 

[Mike F]

 
Why is Lovullo suddenly in demand and why do we care if we lose him?

The last time I remember hearing the "we were
afraid we'd lose him" logic was when the Sox
promoted Butch Hobson.

 

[Yelling At Clouds]

 
Why is Lovullo suddenly in demand and why do we care if we lose him?

Nothing sudden about it - he was interviewed for openings in Minnesota and Houston last year. No reason to think he won't be a candidate for openings in Miami and (going out on a limb) Washington and Cincy, especially now that he's run a team - a team that played well - for two months.

Whether he is worth keeping around is a different discussion, and one I'm not sure any of us can really answer.