Extend John Farrell?
| Yes |  115 (29.56%) |
| No | 132 (33.93%) |
| Wait | 74 (19.02%) |
| Bring back Cito! | 33 (8.48%) |
| This is beside the point. The point is ____. | 35 (9.00%) |
389 votes | 44 featured comments
Credit Ron for this one. I figured I'd hold off until a nice innocuous time to post it - the end of a 4-3 stretch against the AL East, which ended with a blowout loss, seems like as good a time as any.
Never thought I'd say this, but I miss John Gibbons.
What!
What!
I voted to bring back Cito. IMO he has had a lot of success.
It is hard to judge Farrell fairly, for me. This years injuries were too much to overcome. I cannot honestly say if last year was a success or failure.
The question is " Who would Farrell prefer to manage?" Boston is turning into a zoo so going there could be a mistake. I find that AA & Farrell work well together. But the timetable to compete seems to have been moved up, most likely due to the 2nd WC. So IMO the pressure to do well in 2013 exists here as well.
It is hard to judge Farrell fairly, for me. This years injuries were too much to overcome. I cannot honestly say if last year was a success or failure.
The question is " Who would Farrell prefer to manage?" Boston is turning into a zoo so going there could be a mistake. I find that AA & Farrell work well together. But the timetable to compete seems to have been moved up, most likely due to the 2nd WC. So IMO the pressure to do well in 2013 exists here as well.
Apparently 18% of voters believe that Farrell has been good enough to merit an extension of his contract one year before its expiry. I can see the view that he has been a fair manager, and I can see the view that he has been a poor manager, but not the view that he has been a good one. Is it just a difference of opinion, or do those 18% think that one ought to offer extensions to fair managers?
Seeing Adam Lind hit cleanup against a left-handed pitcher yesterday was painful (he's at .221/.265/.344 against them in his career). Where is Yan Gomes? Sometime soon, the club is going to have send a message that long-term poor performance will not be encouraged.
Seeing Adam Lind hit cleanup against a left-handed pitcher yesterday was painful (he's at .221/.265/.344 against them in his career). Where is Yan Gomes? Sometime soon, the club is going to have send a message that long-term poor performance will not be encouraged.
The Jays "who's who" of managing the past 10 years has not been particularly impressive, no?
Apparently 18% of voters believe that Farrell has been good enough to merit an extension of his contract one year before its expiry. I can see the view that he has been a fair manager, and I can see the view that he has been a poor manager, but not the view that he has been a good one. Is it just a difference of opinion, or do those 18% think that one ought to offer extensions to fair managers?
I voted for the extension, not based on merit, but based on the fact that he will be a lame duck manager without one. I don't think it's fair to can him now, and don't like expiring contracts on managers so you extend him a year and decide his fate next offseason. It's not a lot of money - less than what McGowan will earn.
Having a manager go into his final year isn't ideal, so I think it should be a yes or no decision.
Being fairly indifferent, and with Boston likely to come calling, I'd take a worthwhile player and look for a new manager. It'd be interesting, if that happened, if they went to one of the other candidates back when Farrell was hired - Butterfield or Sandy Alomar.
OK, it's a philosophical issue. You give an extension to a fair manager to prevent him from reaching "lame duck" status. The days of Walter Alston are evidently long gone.
What's wrong with lame duck status?
It's better to give him an extention and fire him?
Is Sal Fasano still the coach of the future?
It's better to give him an extention and fire him?
Is Sal Fasano still the coach of the future?
Adam Lind batting cleanup again? I think that I'll watch the Quebec election results for entertainment instead.
If the Jays don't give Farrell an extension this off-season, that tells me the Jays aren't thrilled with his performance.
Like I mentioned previously, a sizeable portion of a manager’s job is not visible to the public. I have yet to hear one current or ex-player badmouth Farrell. The strange thing about Farrell is that when he talks, he comes across as thoughtful and very intelligent. His on field tactics are the exact opposite. If he really wants to join the Red Sox, I would grant him his wish and work out a trade. When you ask me what the strengths of John Farrell are from the perspective of on field strategy, I draw a blank.
Like I mentioned previously, a sizeable portion of a manager’s job is not visible to the public. I have yet to hear one current or ex-player badmouth Farrell. The strange thing about Farrell is that when he talks, he comes across as thoughtful and very intelligent. His on field tactics are the exact opposite. If he really wants to join the Red Sox, I would grant him his wish and work out a trade. When you ask me what the strengths of John Farrell are from the perspective of on field strategy, I draw a blank.
Is it a known fact that Farrell has one year remaining on his current contract? I couldn't find that in a quick search.
I'm with Mike Green, I can't picture the argument that he's been anything better than Fair. And if you extend him to avoid lame duck status... doesn't that just prolong the inevitable? He'll still be nothing better than Fair when the extension runs out.
I say cut him loose now and get on with trying to find a Good or Great manager. Boston offers a convenient diplomatic solution. "We would have loved to keep JF around but his heart was in Boston." I'm not at all worried about the scouting reports he could give to the Sox - neither the Sox nor the Jays are contending next year.
I'm with Mike Green, I can't picture the argument that he's been anything better than Fair. And if you extend him to avoid lame duck status... doesn't that just prolong the inevitable? He'll still be nothing better than Fair when the extension runs out.
I say cut him loose now and get on with trying to find a Good or Great manager. Boston offers a convenient diplomatic solution. "We would have loved to keep JF around but his heart was in Boston." I'm not at all worried about the scouting reports he could give to the Sox - neither the Sox nor the Jays are contending next year.
Yes, Farrell has a year left: http://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/2012/09/04/farrell_committed_to_blue_jays/
As far as this issue goes, I am as emotional over Farrell's occupation of the managerial role as Farrell appears to be about the game of baseball, during a game of baseball.
As far as this issue goes, I am as emotional over Farrell's occupation of the managerial role as Farrell appears to be about the game of baseball, during a game of baseball.
Wait - there's no reason to give Farrell the extra money now. You don't extend players because they become "lame ducks" without a contract the next year. If Farrell wants a new/better contract, he needs to perform his job better. There is every reason to think he could do that, since he's essentially still a "young" manager. He's not good enough or tenured enough to use the cop-outs about contract status. If players can't respect a guy who might be gone by the end of the year, how would they ever respect any manager? What's the turnover rate on managers, 25-30% a year?
Even if you take the optimistic take on Farrell, that he is a fair manager (with good people-handling skills and poor game management), is he the right manager for this club given the amount of financial backing ownership is giving? Ownership seems to want to take a Tampa Bay approach to winning, and for that, it seems to me that it helps to set a standard of excellence at the management level of the club.
For what it is worth, I am not optimistic about Farrell's ability to improve his game management.
For what it is worth, I am not optimistic about Farrell's ability to improve his game management.
With four comments in this thread alone, Mike is taking no chances of being misconstrued on the Farrell issue! (I can only imagine how many votes he cast in this poll....)
It's a matter of honour. One person, one vote. Lives have been lost for less!
I'm only jesting. I know you wouldn't vote early and vote often.
If the Red Sox are willing to give up anything of actual value to get Farrell, do it.
What's wrong with lame duck status?
It's better to give him an extention and fire him?
I think the optics of firing Farrell after the misfortune he's had this season would stick to AA in the future. If you could spin it in a "heart in Boston" manner, then fine. But at the end of the day, he doesn't make a lot of money, so giving him a short extension doesn't inhibit your ability to fire him next season
Is Sal Fasano still the coach of the future?
I'd prefer Dave Martinez.
This today from MLBTR: http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/09/farrell-likely-to-be-top-choice-in-boston.html
if the Red sox will pay relatively handsomely, I'm not too attached to let him go.
My question is - shall we entertain hiring Francona?
it seems to me that if you are selling the notion that you are about to step up to the next level, it's better to hire the high profile guy than to get another rookie, no?
My question is - shall we entertain hiring Francona?
it seems to me that if you are selling the notion that you are about to step up to the next level, it's better to hire the high profile guy than to get another rookie, no?
If you are going to try to win the Tampa Bay way, you want to find someone like Joe Maddon. These innovators are always a good idea, even for clubs willing to spend money, but really a necessity for a club in a tough division. If you're going to lose out to Texas in the Yu Darvish sweepstakes, you don't want to sign a Ron Washington-style manager.
Dave Martinez is more Joe Maddon than Joe Maddon. He's also more Expo than Joe Maddon, which may or may not be relevant.
It depends on whether the alternative is likely to be any better. Managerial situations can get pretty sticky (Valentine, Gaston, Jimy Williams). It's not the worst thing to have an OK guy who doesn't insult anyone and whom the players generally respect. It reminds me of Mencken's assessment of Calvin Coolidge: "There were no thrills while he reigned, but neither were there any headaches. He had no ideas, and he was not a nuisance."
The best managers (Whitey Herzog, Earl Weaver) do have disputes with some players, and are ready to quit if a general manager won't get rid of a particularly difficult player. Some good ones (Billy Martin) have disputes with many of them.
Definitely, if you can get the best, you go for it asap.
But if you're stuck between an OK strategic manager who is deficient in other respects, and one who is OK strategically, has some modest virtues and doesn't cause problems off the field, you take the latter.
But if you're stuck between an OK strategic manager who is deficient in other respects, and one who is OK strategically, has some modest virtues and doesn't cause problems off the field, you take the latter.
As a lame duck manager Cito was very good in 2010 IMO. I also thought M Scioscia was a good manager, but he has not won a lot lately.
I'd prefer Dave Martinez.
Assuming we can poach anyone, I'd go with Ryne Sandberg.
Assuming we can poach anyone, I'd go with Ryne Sandberg.
If you are going to try to win the Tampa Bay way, you want to find someone like Joe Maddon.
If you are going to try to win the Tampa Bay way, you need to finish last and pick first for 10 straight seasons, so you may as well extend Farrell.
...and pay him 30K per year.
I have a different analysis about how Tampa Bay won. Their first round picks 1999-2005 were:
Josh Hamilton- no value obtained
Rocco Baldelli- little value obtained due to illness
B.J. Upton- some value obtained
Delmon Young- little value obtained until extremely provident trade
Jeff Niemann- little value obtained
Wade Townsend- no value obtained
It obviously helps to have a base of talent, which the Rays' management had when it took over. However, it seems to me that the current Jays have that base of talent, and what is missing is the exceptional management that the Rays have had since the arrival of Friedman.
I have a different analysis about how Tampa Bay won. Their first round picks 1999-2005 were:
Josh Hamilton- no value obtained
Rocco Baldelli- little value obtained due to illness
B.J. Upton- some value obtained
Delmon Young- little value obtained until extremely provident trade
Jeff Niemann- little value obtained
Wade Townsend- no value obtained
It obviously helps to have a base of talent, which the Rays' management had when it took over. However, it seems to me that the current Jays have that base of talent, and what is missing is the exceptional management that the Rays have had since the arrival of Friedman.
I say keep him..
However, if Boston is willing to give the Jays Clay Buchholz (or a controllable quality talent) I don't even blink... But then again, why would I? I'm not the general manager....
However, if Boston is willing to give the Jays Clay Buchholz (or a controllable quality talent) I don't even blink... But then again, why would I? I'm not the general manager....
Theo Epstein went to the Cubs for Chris "not that one" Carpenter and Aaron Kurcz. I wouldn't expect any significant return from Farrell.
There is the rub - if someone outside the AL East was after Farrell I suspect it'd happen but Boston is a key competitor and the Jays don't want to help them if at all possible.
Still, batting Lind cleanup 36 times, #5 17 times and just 12 times further down (7 or 8th) sure does make one wonder what is going on in Farrell's mind. Escobar, who also has had a horrid year with the bat from day one, has hit 1/2/4/5/6 in all but 3 games. Both of those moves really look bad.
Still, batting Lind cleanup 36 times, #5 17 times and just 12 times further down (7 or 8th) sure does make one wonder what is going on in Farrell's mind. Escobar, who also has had a horrid year with the bat from day one, has hit 1/2/4/5/6 in all but 3 games. Both of those moves really look bad.
Ken Rosenthal's take on the Farrell situation:
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/toronto-blue-jays-boston-red-sox-john-farrell-bobby-valentine-drive-hard-bargain-091012
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/toronto-blue-jays-boston-red-sox-john-farrell-bobby-valentine-drive-hard-bargain-091012
AA chose Farrell in what was a very intense and long interview process. It's possible that AA likes the way Farrell manages, as scary as that sounds.
I also think hiring from the Rays organization is a good idea. Even if Dave Martinez is not Joe Maddon, he's probably closer than Farrell will ever be.
I voted for an extension for John Farrell before I voted against it.
Sorry, I was just having my John Kerry moment. The reason I voted for an extension is that I've seen nothing really wrong with his managing this year. Some of the criticism has been driven no doubt by frustration at the type of season we've 'enjoyed', or is driven by other less admirable reasons, but none of that criticism has seemed that well-founded to me.
Some are unhappy with the use of the bullpen, but much of that has been driven by a more general disagreement with the way all managers use their closer. One might disagree in retrospect with the trotting out of Cordero on so many occasions after he'd proven (to some) the ineptitude of using him, but I think the hope was always that Cordero could at least be a deadline chip. And it wasn't like there was a proven alternative at the outset of the season.
Farrell seems like a reasonable and intelligent person. I'd be more concerned if he took a talented team not overcome by injury and played the team far below its capability. That hasn't happened here. To suggest we were better with Carlos Tosca in 2004, as one did, is in my view simply ludicrous.
Sorry, I was just having my John Kerry moment. The reason I voted for an extension is that I've seen nothing really wrong with his managing this year. Some of the criticism has been driven no doubt by frustration at the type of season we've 'enjoyed', or is driven by other less admirable reasons, but none of that criticism has seemed that well-founded to me.
Some are unhappy with the use of the bullpen, but much of that has been driven by a more general disagreement with the way all managers use their closer. One might disagree in retrospect with the trotting out of Cordero on so many occasions after he'd proven (to some) the ineptitude of using him, but I think the hope was always that Cordero could at least be a deadline chip. And it wasn't like there was a proven alternative at the outset of the season.
Farrell seems like a reasonable and intelligent person. I'd be more concerned if he took a talented team not overcome by injury and played the team far below its capability. That hasn't happened here. To suggest we were better with Carlos Tosca in 2004, as one did, is in my view simply ludicrous.
Extend him? We should trade him!
Look, he is nothing special. Not worth firing but totally replaceable by Toronto. Yet the Red Sox will likely give us something for him! Let's take it and go get somebody new! Think Butterfield is ready for the big seat?
I have a different analysis about how Tampa Bay won. Their first round picks 1999-2005 were:
Just to quibble - I think they got a bit more than "little value" from Jeff Niemann - rotation starters don't grow on trees, and Niemann went 36-21, 4,13 in 82 starts from 2009-2011. I might also quibble with describing B.J. Upton's contribution as "some value."
But here's the real thing - why stop in 2005? The Rays were still stinking out the joint, and and they were still getting really high draft picks. Which they used on Evan Longoria (3rd overall in 2006) and David Price (1st overall in 2007.) You go to the well often enough...
Just to quibble - I think they got a bit more than "little value" from Jeff Niemann - rotation starters don't grow on trees, and Niemann went 36-21, 4,13 in 82 starts from 2009-2011. I might also quibble with describing B.J. Upton's contribution as "some value."
But here's the real thing - why stop in 2005? The Rays were still stinking out the joint, and and they were still getting really high draft picks. Which they used on Evan Longoria (3rd overall in 2006) and David Price (1st overall in 2007.) You go to the well often enough...
Price wasn't in the majors when the Rays made it in 2008. Longoria was called up at the end of April (and made a large contribution that year).
The key factor, I think, was not the draft picks, but the management. Remember that when new management took over, there were high draft picks on the club, but not a whole of other talent (like Jose Bautista, Roy Halladay...). The overall talent base when Friedman took over was pretty comparable to the base that Anthopoulos had when he arrived (Halladay's salary was high, but the shedding of it led to d'Arnaud, Drabek and Gose).
The key factor, I think, was not the draft picks, but the management. Remember that when new management took over, there were high draft picks on the club, but not a whole of other talent (like Jose Bautista, Roy Halladay...). The overall talent base when Friedman took over was pretty comparable to the base that Anthopoulos had when he arrived (Halladay's salary was high, but the shedding of it led to d'Arnaud, Drabek and Gose).
Who are the options if he leaves? Sal Fasano, Dave Martinez, Sandy Alomar, Tim Wallach, Brian Butterfield, Don Wakamatsu? Anyone else?
ayj, here is my post from a recent thread:
...
Off-topic, but this might be useful starting-point material for a future thread. Jim Bowden's top-ten managerial candidates (ESPN Insider, so I'm omitting all of the commentary):
Ryne Sandburg
Dave Martinez
Mike Maddux
Bo Porter
Tim Bogar
Joe McEwing
Pat Listach
Torey Lovullo
DeMarlo Hale
Terry Francona
http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/the-gms-office/post?id=5015
...
Off-topic, but this might be useful starting-point material for a future thread. Jim Bowden's top-ten managerial candidates (ESPN Insider, so I'm omitting all of the commentary):
Ryne Sandburg
Dave Martinez
Mike Maddux
Bo Porter
Tim Bogar
Joe McEwing
Pat Listach
Torey Lovullo
DeMarlo Hale
Terry Francona
http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/the-gms-office/post?id=5015