Red Sox analysis: Was Chris Sale's usage warranted last night?

     

     Despite the Red Sox winning 9-0 over the Orioles last night, Chris Sale getting his 300th strikeout and the team clinching a playoff spot, I have a few problems with last night’s game. All of my problems are with how John Farrell managed Sale last night.Prior to the game, Farrell announced that Addison Reed and Craig Kimbrel were unavailable to pitch because they had done so in five of the last six games. Because of this, David Price was available to close and available for multiple innings. It made sense. Price has pitched well this season, pitched well on Sunday in his two innings of work and it would give the Red Sox an opportunity to see how Price feels after pitching on shorter rest than what he would get in-between starts.      The seventh inning comes and the Red Sox are winning 6-0. It is now a blowout, a sure win game. Chris Sale, the most taxed arm in Major League Baseball, is at 90 pitches. He’s struggled as of late. Sale pitched to a 2-2 record in August with a 4.38 ERA while giving up 31 hits and eight walks. He didn’t pitch well in his previous start, going only 5 2/3 innings, giving up four runs on six hits. September is Sale’s worse month statistically in his career with only an 11-15 record with a 3.67 ERA with the highest WHIP as well. The demand and strain on the arm could impact Sale by this point according to the numbers as Sale pitches more than 200 innings each year.      The situation was perfect to give Sale rest in a lopsided game, bringing in Price, whom Farrell had everyone expecting would be used for multiple innings. Three innings right there for Price, easy decision for anyone to make.      But Farrell kept Sale in the game. Not only for the seventh, but also the eighth. He threw him for 111 pitches. Perplexing. Why waste Sale in a situation where he isn’t needed? According to Farrell, because he wanted Sale to get his 300^th strikeout.     Sean McAdam of the Boston Sports Journal mentioned that Farrell considered pulling Sale but left him in the game because he was “nearing history.” He also quoted Farrell saying, “We know what the final out represented – him getting to 300 strikeouts. I was aware of that, and you know what, I felt like he was in complete command of this game and had the ability to go out and get that opportunity, he recorded it.”     Doesn’t simple logic tell you though that you don’t throw your best pitcher until he gets his 300^th strikeout? What if he didn’t record it on that pitch? Would Farrell have brought him back out for the 9^th? I don’t put it past him.     Sale didn’t even know that he was coming up on his 300^th strikeout. When asked if he knew about it, the Associated Press quotes Sale saying, “No I didn’t. I went out there and struck out the last guy and everyone started losing it. I knew I was close, but I didn't know I needed just one more." Shows you how much he actually cared about the accomplishment.     Farrell wasn’t managing to win the game last night. He was managing to get his pitcher an accomplishment that meant nothing last night and one that he would surely achieve in his next start. It’s just not sound baseball. Time and time again Farrell has contradicted himself with his words and his actions. Can’t the Red Sox clinch the playoffs with another manager at the helm?

AppleGate gives insight into Farrell's managerial philosophy and clubhouse control

            By the title of the article, you probably assumed I suggest John Farrell has no control over the clubhouse. You’re not wrong. The latest of the “John Farrell has no control over this Red Sox team” came yesterday afternoon when news broke that the team used an Apple watch to relay signals from Yankee catchers to Boston players. According to the news, club personnel used tapes to send messages to a team trainer’s apple watch in which that trainer relayed the pitch signals to the players.

            It’s a lose-lose for Farrell in this situation. He either admits to the act, in which he gets labeled as a cheater, or says he had no idea, which paints him as having no clue what goes on in the clubhouse. Both are bad for Farrell.

            This type of behavior has been one with Farrell for as long as he has been with the Boston Red Sox. Take a trip down memory lane March of 2016 when reports came out that Jessica Moran resigned from Comcast SportsNet amidst the news breaking that she had a relationship with John Farrell. This event isn’t directly involved with how Farrell runs the clubhouse but it sets the precedence of how others will take to Farrell. Example: A player is messing around in the clubhouse, not doing his job, not doing his warm-ups and what not and Farrell must and should step in and set the player straight. Are they more willing to answer to Farrell after knowing that Farrell cheated on his wife and is messing around with the beat reporters? It makes it hard for anyone to want to take him seriously. It’s like the guy telling you what the Patriots should do because he played high school football. How are players supposed to listen to Farrell about doing the right thing when he himself is not?

            Then came the David Price incident where Farrell completely failed at wrangling in the clubhouse. He neglected to apologize for Price’s actions, didn’t take any responsibility for his player and then did nothing to reprimand Price. To me, not only does this indicate that Farrell sides with the players on the issue (which is the complete wrong side) it reeks of Farrell not wanting to discipline players either, as if he may be a little afraid to be tough on them. Maybe Farrell likes to run his clubhouse as if he is one of “they boys,” as if he is one of the players.

            But now comes the information that the team was stealing signals and Farrell did, in fact, know. But yet, Farrell did nothing about it. If you know it’s happening and you know it’s illegal to use electronic devices in the dugout, how come Farrell does nothing about it? It’s yet another sign that John Farrell has no control over the clubhouse and that he likes it that way. See, Farrell does not want to reprimand his players and personnel. He would rather let them do what they want and stay out of it.

            From a managerial perspective, it’s no sound way to run any organization. I need to break out my sports management degree for this one. I was taught that managers are used to hold workers accountable for completing their work in a reasonable and timely fashion. There’s many different theories on how to accomplish this, management by objective, leadership as persuasion, etc. A manager’s task is to use these to accomplish the work at hand. Basic, really. Can’t we say Farrell’s team is not accomplishing their tasks and Farrell’s management philosophy is failing? The team is winning games but the offense is extremely lacking. Match any projections vs production of any Red Sox hitter and the production is consistently underwhelming to the potential projections. Farrell isn’t holding players accountable to this lack of meeting demands either. He likes to stay out of the disciplinary portion of managing.

            The latest news of AppleGate is just another example of Farrell’s managing philosophy. His style is to stay out of disciplining when workers do not do their job. In return, they do what they please and disregard their manager. I'm not in the clubhouse, so I can't comment on whether players respect him or not today. But I know enough about managerial theories to say that Farrell's managerial philosophy has not historically worked. It's only a matter of time where these fissures turn into a complete earthquake.