Let's Talk about the manager -- The John Farrell Thread

[radsoxfan]

 
 
These decisions are probablistic.
 
Edit: I will add the caveat that looking at that spray chart, one wonders if the shift makes sense because of how far to the left his spray actually trends, i.e. does moving Pedroia even really help? But that's at a micro level where I just say "I dunno."

 
Well moving Pedroia to the left of 2nd also moved Drew further into the hole and decreased the gap between him and Middlebrooks. The 3 man alignment on the left side of the infield overall is certainly more capable of getting to the grounders Soriano most typically hits.
 
I don't mind the shift in theory so much, and often wonder why it never seems to happen with righty pull hitters but is so common with lefties. The main concern I have it the lack of a coherent strategy from the manager to the players. Soriano's hit chart probably isn't made up mostly of 95 mph outside fastballs from a righty handed pitcher.  So if you are going to put on that shift, don't the pitcher and catcher have to be prepared to pound him inside or throw mostly breaking pitches?  Tazawa/Lavarnway basically agreed on the one pitch that was almost assured to get hit to the right side.  
 
Maybe I'm not giving the Sox enough credit and Farrell really does have charts that get as specific as Soriano vs. outside fastballs over 95 mph vs RHP... and maybe Soriano still always pulls it on the ground and last night was a total fluke.  A bad result doesn't make it a bad decision, maybe it was just bad luck.  But it sure looked from afar to be pretty asinine to move your 2B over to SS and then throw Soriano a hard fastball away.  Hard to imagine thats the optimal combination of positioning and pitch execution.

 

[radsoxfan]

If I remember right, Pedroia was positioned up the middle or a hair to the first base side of second, so that would presumably be targeting the cluster of hits (with a few outs) in shallow center.

 
He was on the 3rd base side of 2nd base.

 

[smastroyin]

I hate the idea that just because a decision is made with analytics makes it the right decision.  For one, the edges we are talking about are so small compared to the big things like hitting the weak spots in his swing that I hardly see the point of adding another complexity.  Second, the analytics and their application do not seem to account for the fact that players can react to the shift.  I'm really not trying to be an asshole, but which analytics say "hey concede the bunt RBI with a runner on third in favor of a better chance of retiring the guy on a hard grounder?"  I'm still pissed about that play and mistakes can happen but it strikes a negative chord in me in terms of the "they say they look at data and therefore they must be making the correct data driven decisions" feeling.  
 
As for rad's question, the reason you hardly ever see the RH shift is multi-fold.  First, if there is no runner on, your first baseman, who is playing in the second base hole, has to immediately recognize the ball off the bat so he can get over to first and cover.  Second, related, the pitcher more often has to cover on balls that he wouldn't expect to have to cover, since the first baseman is fielding them away from first base.  Third, most managers aren't that willing to leave such a large gap when holding the runner on first.  Obviously you can still lefty shift and hold a runner on first without leaving such a gap.  None of these are problems with the lefty shift except when you abandon a runner on third base to do as he will and then he is almost guaranteed to score and I promise this is the last time I'll mention that play unless it happens again.  As well, there are little things like the second baseman having to receive a ball in a way he's not used to if there is a double play to be turned, etc.
 
Anyway, here is an article from The Hardball Times, which incidentally also identifies Soriano as the best right hand shift candidate in baseball.  Contextually, I still think it was the wrong move.

 

[j44thor]

Another reason not to rh shift is you are increasing the throw the 2b needs to make which could be problematic if he has to range to his right at all.

 

[j44thor]

One final thought on why the RH shift doesn't make a lot of sense.  It is not the same defensive alignment as the LH shift.  Think about when Ortiz hits into the shift, more often than not he is hitting it to the 2B who is playing short RF.  You simply can't do that on the left because no SS is going to be able to throw out a runner from short left.  The only thing you gain from RH shift is taking away a hit just to the left of 2B which doesn't seem likely based on hit charts.
 
What makes the LH shift work is you dramatically increase your 2B response time by playing him back an extra 15 or so feet so he has more time to get to a hard hit ball.  That makes me wonder if you really need to shift or simply back your 2B up, esp if you have a slow runner up such as Ortiz.

 

[joe dokes]

FWIW- Farrell said in the pregame that Soriano had hit THREE grounders to the right side all season vs. RHPs, including his time in Chicago. Right or wrong, he was relying on *something*

 

[Plympton91]

I think the point about context is the key. Soriano had every reason to "take the hit" in that situation. And any time you shift you have to execute, whether they called the outside pitch or Taz missed his spot, they didn't do that.

 

[tims4wins]

Uehara in the 9th with a 4 run lead after throwing 20 pitches last night - why?

Edit: guess he was warming anyway with the 2 run lead. Still don't love it but I can understand it.

 

[j44thor]

So we could have something to bitch about.  

 

[PedroKsBambino]

I think the question to be asked about hitters reacting to the shift is how effectively most can actually do so.  I'm not talking bunts, I'm talking swinging away and actually hitting it somewhere you otherwise almost never do.  Can it happen? Sure, clearly....but it's not just about whether the hitter can sometimes on occasion 'hit it where they ain't' it is whether he hitters overall effectiveness trying to so something he very rarely does really going to be higher than doing what he does most effectively?  I would be very surprised if most hitters could, and I have never seen it studied to suggest they can.
 
Now, who the hitter is matters in the above---if you told me "Wade Boggs could do that" at a level where the shift was a net-negative, but there's very few hitters who show the kind of bat control that he did.  I definitely would not put Soriano in that category.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Uehara in the 9th with a 4 run lead after throwing 20 pitches last night - why?

Edit: guess he was warming anyway with the 2 run lead. Still don't love it but I can understand it.

Day game tomorrow so once you get him up the decision was already made for him to be unavailable tomorrow. Now once he's up I don't want to send someone else out there to put the game in jeopardy only to have to get him up again. I'm a fan of the move.

 

[rembrat]

Uehara in the 9th with a 4 run lead after throwing 20 pitches last night - why?

Edit: guess he was warming anyway with the 2 run lead. Still don't love it but I can understand it.

 
Quick, tell me the leads that were blown in these games then tell me if they were larger than 4 runs. I'll wait.

 

[smastroyin]

I like nailing down this win. I would imagine that Uehara started his routine as soon as Victorino's ball left the park.

They ran the shift on Soriano again. Two key differences: first, while they again stayed on the outside part of the plate, Workman threw breaking pitches and kept them off the plate. Whereas Taz was throwing heat and caught too much of it. Second, with no runner on first, Napoli was playing the hole. Thursday night's ball may have been fieldable had Napoli been in position (may).

I like the idea of trying to rope a dope soriano, give him that right side to look at, then get him to chase outside. As well, by throwing the junk instead of the heat, he has a harder time keeping the bat head back. So, again, I will say that I see a bit of a disconnect between using the analytics and actually executing. You can safely argue that they tried the right thing with Soriano... but to then throw the fastball as hard as you can and catch the plate with it sabotages the idea. So, me personally, I'd rather let Taz do his thing especially with Lavarnway behind the plate and runners on. This is unfortunately results based analysis.

 

[P'tucket rhymes with...]

I don't mind Ue there, either, for the reasons noted above.  Moreover, with a 7.5 game lead this morning, it's looking like he'll be able to get plenty of rest over the next couple of weeks.

 

[Van Everyman]

Farrell said Ue was "adamant" about pitching in the 9th last night. Normally I hate that "players coach" shit – your job is to manage the team based on what you think the team needs, not what individuals want.

But in this case, Koji clearly wanted to bury the Yankees in the Bidet in front of their own fans. I not only can't blame Farrell for that – I wholly support his desire to unleash Koji's inner-ninja assassin.

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

Farrell said Ue was "adamant" about pitching in the 9th last night. Normally I hate that "players coach" shit – your job is to manage the team based on what you think the team needs, not what individuals want. But in this case, Koji clearly wanted to bury the Yankees in the Bidet in front of their own fans. I not only can't blame Farrell for that – I wholly support his desire to unleash Koji's inner-ninja assassin.

Of course, we are just guessing what was going on in his head .. I think it just as likely he wanted to get back out there ASAP to get his splitter back to its usual devastating perfection. He had squat for stuff on Friday .. Somewhat better last night. He still hung a couple rather badly.

 

[j44thor]

I like nailing down this win. I would imagine that Uehara started his routine as soon as Victorino's ball left the park. They ran the shift on Soriano again. Two key differences: first, while they again stayed on the outside part of the plate, Workman threw breaking pitches and kept them off the plate. Whereas Taz was throwing heat and caught too much of it. Second, with no runner on first, Napoli was playing the hole. Thursday night's ball may have been fieldable had Napoli been in position (may). I like the idea of trying to rope a dope soriano, give him that right side to look at, then get him to chase outside. As well, by throwing the junk instead of the heat, he has a harder time keeping the bat head back. So, again, I will say that I see a bit of a disconnect between using the analytics and actually executing. You can safely argue that they tried the right thing with Soriano... but to then throw the fastball as hard as you can and catch the plate with it sabotages the idea. So, me personally, I'd rather let Taz do his thing especially with Lavarnway behind the plate and runners on. This is unfortunately results based analysis.

 
With or without the shift hasn't the book on Soriano always been to throw him off-speed junk down and away?
 
I did like UE coming in last night since he would only be available one more time this series either way and we know the team isn't scoring 10 runs again with Lackey on the mound so might as well take the bird in hand. I'd prefer they give UE a well deserved 3 day vaca now so he can also bury TB next week.

 

[Bellhorn]

 
 
I did like UE coming in last night since he would only be available one more time this series either way and we know the team isn't scoring 10 runs again with Lackey on the mound so might as well take the bird in hand. I'd prefer they give UE a well deserved 3 day vaca now so he can also bury TB next week.

I don't follow...are you seriously suggesting that the fact that they will likely not score many runs tonight (leaving aside the question of whether or not this premise is in any way justified in the first place) means that we are less likely to see a high-leverage situation?

 

[mfried]

I don't follow...are you seriously suggesting that the fact that they will likely not score many runs tonight (leaving aside the question of whether or not this premise is in any way justified in the first place) means that we are less likely to see a high-leverage situation?

Koji looks a bit tired to me (as does Taz) despite the phenomenal results.  The 7.5 game lead should shift the relief burden onto Workman, Morales and Breslow.  RDLR looks questionable for high-leverage situations but can eat a couple of innings here and there.  Re today: the paucity of Sox runs in Lackey games is either purely coincidental or is based on the players subverting the pitcher. The combination of Huff, JBJ and Bogaerts might be just the ticket in either case.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Koji looks a bit tired to me (as does Taz) despite the phenomenal results.  The 7.5 game lead should shift the relief burden onto Workman, Morales and Breslow.  RDLR looks questionable for high-leverage situations but can eat a couple of innings here and there.  Re today: the paucity of Sox runs in Lackey games is either purely coincidental or is based on the players subverting the pitcher. The combination of Huff, JBJ and Bogaerts might be just the ticket in either case.

I would say run support for a starter is random and coincidental UNTIL it becomes a topic of discussion in the clubhouse. At that point the results either level off immediately due to variance OR the players psychologically are affected and unconsciously begin to press. Until we break out and put up an 8 or a 9 for Lackey it will remain noticeable to the players and could continue being a burden on their performance.

I guess what I'm saying is that it can only remain "random" when its presence doesn't affect the everyday players. If it is being discussed, which everyone is doing, I'm guessing that it is affecting their performance and will continue to do so until be break out when Lackey is pitching. Positive/Negative reinforcement and all that stuff.

 

[Bellhorn]

Koji looks a bit tired to me (as does Taz) despite the phenomenal results.  The 7.5 game lead should shift the relief burden onto Workman, Morales and Breslow.  RDLR looks questionable for high-leverage situations but can eat a couple of innings here and there.  Re today: the paucity of Sox runs in Lackey games is either purely coincidental or is based on the players subverting the pitcher. The combination of Huff, JBJ and Bogaerts might be just the ticket in either case.

I have no problem with using Koji yesterday, or with him being unavailable today and perhaps tomorrow as well.  I just found the logic contained in that post to be a little ridiculous.

 

[OttoC]

I don't follow...are you seriously suggesting that the fact that they will likely not score many runs tonight (leaving aside the question of whether or not this premise is in any way justified in the first place) means that we are less likely to see a high-leverage situation?

 
Whether the premise of whether they don't score many runs today is not necessarily unjustified. Wouldn't one expect a regression to the mean? Some streaks from this year following the team's double-digit scores:
 
13.3,5,2,2
10,3,0,1,3
12,5,4,1
11,3,17,2,6,5
10,10,3.2,4,0
10,3,5,11,5,7
11,11,8,4,0,2,4,2
15,7,1,6,5
12,0,4,8
13,4,2,4
12,9,12,???
 

 

[Bellhorn]

 
Whether the premise of whether they don't score many runs today is not necessarily unjustified. Wouldn't one expect a regression to the mean? Some streaks from this year following the team's double-digit scores:

 

Regression to the mean: yes.  Assumption that the observed phenomenon of low run totals in Lackey starts has predictive value: not so much, at least without further evidence being introduced.  And as RudyP says, that's not really the point in the first place.

 

[OttoC]

I'm not arguing whether there will be a save opportunity or whether there will be fewer runs just because Lackey is pitching; I'm just saying that I'd probably put my money on a lower scoring game because of regression to the mean.
 
Just stretching this out a little more, if you look at the games in terms of a 5-man rotation (1,6,11.../2,7,12.../3.8.13.../4,9,14.../5,10,15...), the average runs scored are:
 
S1   5.31
S2   5.48
S3   5.10
S4   5.32
S5   4.68
 
Lackey has pitched 15 games in group S5 and 10 games in S4. I'm assuming that was because of days off shifting the rotation. That turned out to be costly for him because if he had pitched all his starts in the S5 group, he would have had 41 more runs scored. For example, he pitched game 114 (S4) instead of game 115 (S5); the Red Sox scored no runs in game 114 but 15 in game 115. Just the breaks of the game.

 

[ivanvamp]

I'm not arguing whether there will be a save opportunity or whether there will be fewer runs just because Lackey is pitching; I'm just saying that I'd probably put my money on a lower scoring game because of regression to the mean.
 
Just stretching this out a little more, if you look at the games in terms of a 5-man rotation (1,6,11.../2,7,12.../3.8.13.../4,9,14.../5,10,15...), the average runs scored are:
 
S1   5.31
S2   5.48
S3   5.10
S4   5.32
S5   4.68
 
Lackey has pitched 15 games in group S5 and 10 games in S4. I'm assuming that was because of days off shifting the rotation. That turned out to be costly for him because if he had pitched all his starts in the S5 group, he would have had 41 more runs scored. For example, he pitched game 114 (S4) instead of game 115 (S5); the Red Sox scored no runs in game 114 but 15 in game 115. Just the breaks of the game.

 
It is a bummer for him this year no doubt.  But my goodness, he more than had his fair share of good fortune the other way in 2010 and 2011, when he "won" 26 games while putting up a 5.26 era, 82 era+, and 1.50 whip.  
 
In 2010 he was 34th among qualified starters in the AL with a 4.40 era, but tied for 15th in wins with 14.
In 2011 he had one of the worst seasons as a starter in baseball history, but still managed to be tied for 21st in the AL in wins with 12.  

 

[kieckeredinthehead]

I'm not arguing whether there will be a save opportunity or whether there will be fewer runs just because Lackey is pitching; I'm just saying that I'd probably put my money on a lower scoring game because of regression to the mean.
 
Just stretching this out a little more, if you look at the games in terms of a 5-man rotation (1,6,11.../2,7,12.../3.8.13.../4,9,14.../5,10,15...), the average runs scored are:
 
S1   5.31
S2   5.48
S3   5.10
S4   5.32
S5   4.68
 
Lackey has pitched 15 games in group S5 and 10 games in S4. I'm assuming that was because of days off shifting the rotation. That turned out to be costly for him because if he had pitched all his starts in the S5 group, he would have had 41 more runs scored. For example, he pitched game 114 (S4) instead of game 115 (S5); the Red Sox scored no runs in game 114 but 15 in game 115. Just the breaks of the game.

 
But whose regression to the mean? If we're regressing towards Lackey's run support mean, they should score a ton today. I don't really get why you would split out games in that way, either. That looks like noise, and it seems unlikely that any team actually fits their starters into those slots throughout the season.

 

[j44thor]

I don't follow...are you seriously suggesting that the fact that they will likely not score many runs tonight (leaving aside the question of whether or not this premise is in any way justified in the first place) means that we are less likely to see a high-leverage situation?

 
Its called sarcasm, though the point stands that it is better to use him last night than save him for today when you might not need him one way or another.

 

[OttoC]

... I'm just saying that I'd probably put my money on a lower scoring game because of regression to the mean.
 

 
Then again....

 

[Rough Carrigan]

But . . . what would Springsteen have done?
 
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324432404579053063732626076.html

 

[Bellhorn]

Its called sarcasm, though the point stands that it is better to use him last night than save him for today when you might not need him one way or another.

My bad....I'm pretty terrible when it comes to identifying humor. Carry on.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

Why not Uehara in the 9th?

 

[bosockboy]

Why not Uehara in the 9th?

Road game?

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

 
Road game?

 
Not good enough. Using your best reliever in a tie game in the 9th makes sense, since 1 runs costs you the game. If anything, it's a lesser leveraged situation to use a lesser reliever in the bottom of the inning on the road if you have a lead. IE use Uehara in the tie game, and if the Sox go ahead in the 10th and Uehara can't go any longer, then use Workman, since if he gives up a run the game is still tied and the Sox would still have a chance to win it.
 
I hate modern bullpen usage. Hate hate hate hate hate it.

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

But . . . what would Springsteen have done?
 
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324432404579053063732626076.html

 
Can you cut/paste the key parts?  Paywall

 

[canyoubelieveit]

I don't like autopilot "by the book" bullpen usage either, but I'm fine with not using Ue today.  He's pitched a ton, I wouldn't have wanted to use him for more than 3 outs, and it made sense to save him for a save situation (edit:  which would still likely be a high leverage situation, rather than there being something so sacred about "save situations" that only Ue should pitch them).  There's an argument to be made that Ue could have been used for the best hitters in the Yankees lineup (who happened to bat in the 9th), but it's not as though those hitters overmatched Workman.  With a comfortable division lead and an ongoing need to see what we've got in pitchers like Workman, it was a reasonable choice.  If it were the last game of the season and we were on the bubble, I would have wanted Ue there but even then it's not a slam dunk.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Why not Uehara in the 9th?

He pitched Thurs and Friday.....6 of the last 10 calendar days, have the division pretty much locked up, and despite the results being good on Friday he hung more than a couple pitches showing some wear.

Other guys have to learn to step up in the pen and today they had an opportunity while Koji gets some much needed rest.

 

[rembrat]

 
Not good enough. Using your best reliever in a tie game in the 9th makes sense, since 1 runs costs you the game. If anything, it's a lesser leveraged situation to use a lesser reliever in the bottom of the inning on the road if you have a lead. IE use Uehara in the tie game, and if the Sox go ahead in the 10th and Uehara can't go any longer, then use Workman, since if he gives up a run the game is still tied and the Sox would still have a chance to win it.
 
I hate modern bullpen usage. Hate hate hate hate hate it.

 
This game wasn't a must win. Taxing your bullpen and your position players just to try to sweep the Yankees is shortsighted considering it's time to start resting guys and getting healthy for the playoffs.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

They have an off day tomorrow, dont they? He can get his rest then. He wasnt used yesterday due to rest. He should have been used today.

Saving him for a save makes no sense to me. Going into the borlttom of the ninth the game was tied. The ONLY chance the Sox had to win the game was not to allow a run in the bottom of the nintg. Who is the reliever least likely to allow a run? Uehara. Therefore he should havebeen used.

 

[moondog80]

They have an off day tomorrow, dont they? He can get his rest then. He wasnt used yesterday due to rest. He should have been used today.

Saving him for a save makes no sense to me. Going into the borlttom of the ninth the game was tied. The ONLY chance the Sox had to win the game was not to allow a run in the bottom of the nintg. Who is the reliever least likely to allow a run? Uehara. Therefore he should havebeen used.

But for the Sox to win, someone is going to have to pitch the bottom of the inning after the Sox go ahead. If Uehara pitches the 9th, the Sox go ahead in the 10th, and then Workman finishes it off, how is that any better?
 
EDIT: I suppose maybe Koji shuts them down and the Sox explode for 5 runs, making the 10th inning less critical.  Still, Koji's pitched a lot lately, and is 2.1 IP from his career high.  I don't mind this.

 

[canyoubelieveit]

There are risks and benefits to using Ue there, and the context matters.  In game 7 of the World Series, I think he needs to pitch there for the reasons you give.  But a 38-year old pitcher who has been shouldering a heavy load, where an additional day off now may allow him to be used in a similar situation in October, in a game where someone needs to get those three outs (either in the 9th or in extras), when you need to find out which other relievers you can rely on, and with the most likely extra inning save scenario being a 1-run game (which has to a similarly high leverage situation to a tie game in the 9th), I think the choice was right.
 
There have been lots of times where I also would have wanted the best reliever to pitch the bottom of the 9th in a tie game away, so I do respect your argument.  I just don't feel that way in this game, in this context.

 

[Plympton91]

Uehara was warming when they tied the score in the top of the 9th, so I agree with you.  However, I wouldn't have had a problem with them just looking to get Uehara 3 consecutive days off at this point.  Barring a catastrophe, they're the AL East winners at this point and Uehara is already at his career high workload at age 39 or whatever.  They need to dial back on him.
 
Though again, he started warming, so that wasn't the thought process.  If you're going to use him, use him in that 9th inning with the Yankees about to bring in Phil effing Hughes.

 

[canyoubelieveit]

But for the Sox to win, someone is going to have to pitch the bottom of the inning after the Sox go ahead. If Uehara pitches the 9th, the Sox go ahead in the 10th, and then Workman finishes it off, how is that any better?

 
To play devil's advocate, there's a possibility that the Red Sox recent juggernaut of an offense scores multiple runs in the top of the 10th against an overworked Yankees pen, in which case Workman (or whoever) pitches the easier half-inning.  But I still don't make that choice in this game for the reasons above.
 
But then...if Workman can get through the 9th and the Sox put up a crooked number, than someone else could close it out and Ue could get an extra day of rest.  That's the best case scenario, and with the big division lead advantage, I'm okay with gambling a little in hopes of getting a best-case-scenario result.  It comes down to whether the team thinks Ue would benefit from being used only when absolutely needed at this point.

 

[moondog80]

 
To play devil's advocate, there's a possibility that the Red Sox recent juggernaut of an offense scores multiple runs in the top of the 10th against an overworked Yankees pen, in which case Workman (or whoever) pitches the easier half-inning.  But I still don't make that choice in this game for the reasons above.
 
 

 Yeah, I thought of this and ammended my comment while you were posting.  This is still relatively unlikely enough where I'm OK with rest - if the season goes on as long as we hope, Koji will set a new career high IP by quite a bit.

 

[Rough Carrigan]

 
Can you cut/paste the key parts?  Paywall

Jeez, I just went to it through Google and I think I can see everything.  And I don't have a subscription.  Anyway:

 

John Farrell, 51, manages the Boston Red Sox. He spoke with reporter Marc Myers.

I first heard Bruce Springsteen's "Darkness on the Edge of Town" in the summer of 1978, when I was 15. I grew up in Monmouth Beach, N.J., with my brother and four sisters, so one of them always had the album and song playing. Today, "Darkness" reminds me of where I came from and helps me think through big decisions.

Until I was in my mid-20s, I was a pleaser. Whether it was to win my dad's acceptance or the attention of high school and college coaches, I was preoccupied with approval. But in my 20s, I realized that being a pleaser would only keep me from taking necessary risks and going my own way.

Springsteen's lyrics in the second verse of "Darkness" helped: "Everybody's got a secret, sonny / Something that they just can't face…Till someday they just cut it loose / Cut it loose or let it drag 'em down." As a pitcher in school and the majors, I identified with the third verse, too: "Tonight I'll be on that hill 'cause I can't stop / I'll be on that hill with everything I got."

Those who get to play pro sports confront more personal challenges sooner than most people. Pro athletes have accelerated careers and hit a midlife crisis in their 30s. So the song's third verse hits home. But it's more than just words. The E Street Band's music reflects the athlete's struggle against time. There's a loping pace to the song that bottoms out and picks up with wall-shattering energy.

Having grown up in a blue-collar family, I wasn't born into a good life. But I'm thankful I've had to work hard, which makes what I do more rewarding. I've also been fortunate in my career to be presented with great professional opportunities. Those moments have forced me to figure out whether to stay with the status quo or change. Without a doubt, "Darkness" has come to mind in those situations.

Back in the early 2000s, I met Springsteen briefly in Cleveland, when I worked in the Indians' front office. I had backstage access to his concert at what was then Jacobs Field, so it was just a quick shake of the hand. "Darkness" is more than a song for me, so even a fast handclasp was pretty electrifying.
 

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

Thanks, pretty cool stuff.

 

[absintheofmalaise]

I posted in the Seminar thread that Farrell believes in having set roles for relievers. He feels that they perform better knowing what their roles are because of the mental preparation involved. A lot of the questions raised in this thread have been answered there.

 

[EllisTheRimMan]

They have an off day tomorrow, dont they? He can get his rest then. He wasnt used yesterday due to rest. He should have been used today.

Saving him for a save makes no sense to me. Going into the borlttom of the ninth the game was tied. The ONLY chance the Sox had to win the game was not to allow a run in the bottom of the nintg. Who is the reliever least likely to allow a run? Uehara. Therefore he should havebeen used.

 
I think, realistically, Workman didn't do too bad.  Sure, he let one sail that Salty maybe should have nabbed  and that cost the Sox the game, but it wasn't like he imploded.  He had two outs and a man on third.  I was confirdent the way he was pitching and has pitched that he'd get out of it.  He didn't and it was a painful way to lose especially with Claiborne or some other bullpen scrub coming in for the 10th.  Tough loss, but I don't think going to Workman was a bad choice at the time nor in hindsight given his actual performance yesterday... he looked perfectly capable of getting through that inning, but in the end did not.

 

[trekfan55]

Lost in the shuffle of the discussion on whether or not Uehara should have been used in the 9th is the way that run scored.
 
Giving up a single to Ichiro can happen to anyone, and let's face it, one of the "givens" in baseball is that you can easily steal on them. So with 2 outs, Ichiro scores on, of all things a wild pitch.  It's not like Workman was pounded there and he could have very easily been out of the inning with Ichiro stranded at 3rd.
 
Edit:  In other words, basically what EllistheRimMan said

 

[catomatic]

 
I think, realistically, Workman didn't do too bad.  Sure, he let one sail that Salty maybe should have nabbed  and that cost the Sox the game, but it wasn't like he imploded.  He had two outs and a man on third.  I was confirdent the way he was pitching and has pitched that he'd get out of it.  He didn't and it was a painful way to lose especially with Claiborne or some other bullpen scrub coming in for the 10th.  Tough loss, but I don't think going to Workman was a bad choice at the time nor in hindsight given his actual performance yesterday... he looked perfectly capable of getting through that inning, but in the end did not.

Agreed. I thought he looked good. It may already have been mentioned numerous times in this thread, and if so, please forgive—but I thought the sun to shadow conditions at that late afternoon hour played a big part in Salty's reaction time. I think he gets that ball if he has a better chance to track it. 

 

[joe dokes]

I almost never like walking the bases loaded, because it makes a pitcher ptch differently. But last night.....walking Guy Pearce guaranteed that that Chris Davis would bat with the bases loaded unless Machado hit into a DP.  Seemed like a bad gamble to me at the time. I know it was good hitting on a tough pitch, but it was still Pearce and Machado with 2nd and 3rd or Machado and Davis with the bases loaded. I didn't like the manager's choice.