Terry Francona

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Mon May 11, 2009 5:25 pm

As a Boston fan, I have a fairly biased view of Terry Francona. he brought Sox fans their first titles in ost of our lifetimes. Some commentators have called him the best Sox manager in decades, some call him one of the top managers in the game.
I'm curious what those of you with a less favorable bias towards the Sox think of him. Is Tito The Shit or a Twit?

Orioles · Post by **Orioles** » Mon May 11, 2009 5:37 pm

Also biased as a Sox fan, but I think one thing to be noted is that what makes him great in Boston might not make him great for a different team. Joe Maddon's great for the Rays b/c he's a really positive guy, and made those young players truly believe they were better than the big bad Sox and Yankees. Tito's great in Boston b/c players can count on his ability to minimize the insanely intense media and fan scrutiny as a factor in personnel decisions by frequently absorbing blame for putting players in situations where they've failed and crediting them (not himself) when they succeed. He's a sound overall tactician (no matter where you stand on manager in-game impact) who does a good job managing his pitching staff, top-to-bottom. He's suited for the diverse mix of guys the Red Sox will typically have in any given year, whereas a different personality might be better suited to a situation where one of every three years you're probably fielding a very young, rebuilding team (like Gardenhire in Minnesota). I won't say he'd fall flat in a situation like that, but he's well-suited to Boston, and takes advantage of the excellent resources (talent and information) that the club gives him to work with.

Mets · Post by **Mets** » Mon May 11, 2009 5:51 pm

I'm biased to the NL, so I have no idea.

I'd be curious to see how he handles a bullpen, double switches, sacrifice bunts, etc. over the course of 150 NL games.

Also, Gardenhire has gotten above average results out of marginal players (much like Bobby Cox). I'd be curious to see what Francona would do with a team like the Braves, Reds, Blue Jays, Rangers, Royals........teams that could be anwhere from 3rd to last in their division, but with the right breaks could also be hanging around in September.

Tigers · Post by **Tigers** » Mon May 11, 2009 6:06 pm

Mets wrote:I'm biased to the NL, so I have no idea.

I'd be curious to see how he handles a bullpen, double switches, sacrifice bunts, etc. over the course of 150 NL games.

You could check his 1997-2000 stint in the NL for that. Not that he had similar talent on those teams as he has had in Boston, but the guy has spent plenty of time managing in the NL.

I'm still from the school that managers don't make that big a difference, unless of course we are talking about Sweet Lou.....then game entertainment value goes up 10 fold when he's on the bench or in an umps face.

Astros · Post by **Astros** » Mon May 11, 2009 6:59 pm

I hold Francona in the same regard as I hold Torre, when has he won anything when he didn't have one of the 2 or 3 highest payrolls in the game? When your team can go out and sign the best free agents to fill holes, winning is a lot easier than having to go to the scrap heap or developing your own players. Francona didn't win much in Philly, Torre didn't win in St. Louis. Plus, you don't manage in the AL, there's no strategy, its boring

DBacks · Post by **DBacks** » Mon May 11, 2009 7:03 pm

Mariners wrote: I'm still from the school that managers don't make that big a difference, unless of course we are talking about Sweet Lou.....then game entertainment value goes up 10 fold when he's on the bench or in an umps face.

Agree completely. Watching Lou is a blast. I hope he's around for a longtime. I dont care if he's managing from a wheelchair and he has to push himself out there to cause trouble.

As far as Tito goes, I like him, but I think managers in the AL are pretty much useless. I'll reserve complete judgement on him when he see what he does about Big Papi. I know a gripe against him is that he's too loyal to some players, or so I've read, I really don't know, but at some point he has to make a move down in the lineup or something. We'll see.

Giants · Post by **Giants** » Mon May 11, 2009 7:03 pm

Go back and read some Bill Simmons columns about Francona during the 2004 regular season. They weren't exactly flattering. I think Tito is a guy who excels at getting out of the way, which is really a manager's most crucial skill. The research says that good managers don't really add that many wins, but bad managers take them away. Is he John McGraw or Sparky Anderson? Eh, not really, but that's not really his job. I think the New York love affair with Joe Torre (who had mediocre results in 14 years as a manager before finding the right bunch of players in New York) raised the bar for the ideal of a manager, when the reality is that he's a nice figurehead and not much more, unless he's Dusty Baker/Grady Little style retarded.

Mets · Post by **Mets** » Mon May 11, 2009 7:04 pm

I was referring to 2009 Francona, not the less experienced Francona that managed in the NL in the past.

Tigers · Post by **Tigers** » Mon May 11, 2009 8:16 pm

Mets wrote:I was referring to 2009 Francona, not the less experienced Francona that managed in the NL in the past.

Fair enough. You didn't specify lately, so I wasn't sure if you knew he'd started out in the NL and managed there for a number of seasons.

While his winning % wasn't good in the NL, he did take over a Phil team that was coming off a pretty horrible season and managed to improve them each of the next couple years before dropping off in 2000 and getting the axe. He was extremly young in those days for a manager and maybe with a different roster and with more experience he'd do just fine in the NL....but who knows. I think the important part though is that he has managed in the NL and his team showed improvement the first few seasons. Maybe it was him, maybe it wasn't, maybe that team he took over was so bad the only way it could go was up.

I'm really completely neutral when it comes to Francona. Don't know whether he makes a difference one way or the other, however I think Jake probably says it best when he says what Francona does best is stay out of the players way and lets them play.

Phillies · Post by **Phillies** » Mon May 11, 2009 8:43 pm

Francono's team was a joke when he managed for us.

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Mon May 11, 2009 8:55 pm

Now that there's been a bit said, i thought I'd add a bit of my own perspective. i agree with what was said above (I think by Jake, but I'm lazy) that managers don't make uch difference in terms of winning and losing, they're mostly figureheads. However, a truly bad manager, can certainly cost a team a lot of games and i definitely don't think Francona is one of those.
He seems to manage the media/player interaction well, which in a town like Boston, is probably the most important quality (aside from not giving away games) but how he handles Big Papi's decline (I don't personally expect a rebound at this point) will be very telling IMO.

Phillies · Post by **Phillies** » Tue May 12, 2009 12:04 pm

Chan Ho Park has more homers than Ortiz.

Orioles · Post by **Orioles** » Tue May 12, 2009 1:04 pm

If the wrist is structurally sound, then it's in Papi's head. The best thing for him would have been signing Teixeira to let someone else be the middle-of-the-order power from the left side long enough for him to work out the kinks w/out people asking him every day what's wrong. Unfortunately he IS the only true LH HR threat in the lineup, so even dropping him in the lineup will not ease the mental burden or spotlight on his power outage. One thing we know about baseball is that people poring over the stats every day easily work themselves into a frenzy about a player being "done" for one reason or another. I recall multiple articles since last season about how Verlander and Crawford's stats were very worriesome and that there's a chance both young guys had peaked already. A couple big K games and some hot-hitting by Crawford and all of a sudden everybody loves them again (even if that's premature as well). Papi's older than those guys, but the Red Sox seem to know what they're doing when it comes to injury concerns, so I trust they're handling the situation correctly. If he's on the decline, so be it, but I'd be surprised if he's actually the .230 hitter with zero HR power that he's been during this early slump.

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Tue May 12, 2009 2:09 pm

The thing about Papi, aside from being older, is that it seems like when players of his type decline, they tend to do so very quickly. This isn't a one-season deal either, his numbers were down quite a bit last season. At this point, I think he's probably done. Not career ending 'done', but I don't think he'll ever be a middle of the order threat again.

Astros · Post by **Astros** » Tue May 12, 2009 2:14 pm

I think this has a lot more to do with Manny not being behind him than suddenly he just loses everything

Orioles · Post by **Orioles** » Tue May 12, 2009 3:08 pm

RedSox wrote:The thing about Papi, aside from being older, is that it seems like when players of his type decline, they tend to do so very quickly. This isn't a one-season deal either, his numbers were down quite a bit last season. At this point, I think he's probably done. Not career ending 'done', but I don't think he'll ever be a middle of the order threat again.

Yes, but the players like him who have declined rapidly typically have been regulars for longer, and have played in the field for a significant portion of their careers (or at least the early portion). Will he hit 40+ HR again? Maybe not, but 35 w/ tons of BB and a fair number of 2B isn't crazy. Ortiz is not Mo Vaughn.

Cardinals wrote:I think this has a lot more to do with Manny not being behind him than suddenly he just loses everything

For one, before his injury last season, Ortiz had a higher career OPS without Manny hitting behind him. For another, Kevin Youkilis is a pretty ok hitter in the cleanup spot.

Of course, until he hits a couple HR and gets comfortable at the dish again, "he's done" will be everyone's reaction despite the fact that he managed an .877 OPS last season w/ a wrist injury. Maybe now that teams see him as "done" and are more worried about Youkilis, they'll start throwing him some fat pitches. I have a hard time believing he won't recover at least some of his mojo at some point this year.

Yankees · Post by **Yankees** » Tue May 12, 2009 3:37 pm

Isn't going 116 ab's without a homer at least troubling?

Orioles · Post by **Orioles** » Tue May 12, 2009 4:02 pm

Royals wrote:Isn't going 116 ab's without a homer at least troubling?

Most definitely troubling. But not "done" as in his career, or as a 30+ HR threat, in my opinion.

Yankees · Post by **Yankees** » Tue May 12, 2009 4:15 pm

I'm willing to accept that statement - so long as the "troubling" stays.

As a Yankee fan, Ortiz was the most terrifying hitter of the last few years. This year, I'd rather face Ortiz than George Kottaras.

Athletics · Post by **Athletics** » Tue May 12, 2009 6:44 pm

Youre getting production out of everyone besides Ortiz and Varitek, which you can't really complain about. It's very troubling to see a hitter like Papi struggle, but Pedroia, Lowell, Youk, Bay and Drew are more than enough to carry the offense. Lowell has 28 RBIs in 31 games coming off hip surgery, Bays sporting a .468 OBP and has as many big hits this year as anyone, Youk and Pedroia have been there usual selves (besides Pedroias lackluster 1 HR), Nick Green of all people has filled in tremendously after Lowrie and Lugo went down, Drew is starting off slow as usual, but he has more HRs right now than he did last year at this time.

You're 20-12 without him producing. I'd take a deep lineup like ours anyday over Tex, Arod, Jeter and scrubs.

Athletics · Post by **Athletics** » Tue May 12, 2009 6:46 pm

Shit, sorry Z, I misread your post and decided to Yankee bash anyway.