< Back to front page Text size +

Manager choice not as important as roster moves for Red Sox

Posted by Matt Pepin, Boston.com Staff  October 10, 2012 09:06 AM

E-mail this article

Invalid E-mail address
Invalid E-mail address

Sending your article

The Red Sox do not need John Farrell so much as they need someone like him, which admittedly may be trickier than it seems. Farrell has the polish and intelligence to deal with Red Sox owners, administrators and media. He has the credibility and presence to deal with players. And he communicates clearly, directly and, when needed, sternly.

What Farrell would not have in Boston, at least at the moment, is the players he needs to contend with the iron of the American League, which really should be the focus of the Red Sox this offseason.

And which is why the Sox must move relatively quickly with their managerial search, whether it leads them to Farrell or anyone else.

Managerial searches are difficult to completely botch, after all, which speaks even greater volumes about the disaster that was Bobby Valentine. Dale Sveum surely would have lasted longer than this. By the time next spring rolls around, the Red Sox will have had three managers (non-interim) in three seasons for the first time since the early 1930s, which hardly qualifies as the golden age of Red Sox baseball.

When Terry Francona was hired, after all, nobody imagined Francona would last eight years or that he would win two world titles. Joe Torre was hardly the managerial icon he is now when the New York Yankees hired him to replace Buck Showalter between the 1995 and 1996 seasons. In baseball, the players make the manager far more frequently than the other way around, which is why nobody should get too bogged down with Farrell, no matter how much we all regard him as a leading candidate.

In Seattle, Eric Wedge has many of the same qualities Farrell does. The Chicago White Sox' Robin Ventura is also similar. The Red Sox will find someone capable to manage this team - despite the disaster that was Valentine - whether it is Farrell or not.

But rebuilding the Red Sox roster and pitching staff? That will be a far more challenging and important task, whether the Red Sox are managed by Connie Mack or Connie Britton.

With all due respect to Farrell, let's remember how he ended up in Boston in the first place. From 2001 to 2006, Farrell was the director of player development for the Cleveland Indians, where he crossed paths, if only for a year, with Terry Francona. Prior to the 2007 season, Francona lobbied for Farrell to replace Dave Wallace. The point is that Farrell was Francona's guy more than he was anyone else's, though he certainly forged his own reputation and relationships by the time he left the club.

If Ben Cherington wants Farrell, fine. But if Farrell is the preferred choice of John Henry, Tom Werner or Larry Lucchino, let us all cast a wary eye. If Lucchino is indeed the man who runs the Red Sox, as Henry has told us, then we should all remember that Lucchino's two managerial choices were Grady Little and Valentine. Both of those seemed like name selections more than baseball ones, which should make you scrutinize the Farrell hiring now.

Is Farrell a better in-game manager than Little, a better communicator than Valentine? It would seem so. Maybe that makes those comparisons unfair. But Farrell will end up like both of those men if he does not get what Francona possessed in Boston - and we're not talking about the relationship between Francona and general manager Theo Epstein that generally remained quite solid for nearly a decade.

We're talking about talent. During the same winter that Francona was hired, the Red Sox added Curt Schilling and Keith Foulke to a roster that had taken them to extra innings of Game 7 of the American League Championship Series. Francona excelled in crisis management that October, but he would be the first to tell you that he had the horses.

All of this should certainly resonate with Cherington, whose rookie season in Boston did not go much better than Valentine's - at least on the field. (Cherington certainly did not create the off-field distractions that Valentine did.) Cherington's primary job last offseason was to add reliable innings to the starting rotation and rebuild the back end of the bullpen, and he did neither. In fact, he failed miserably at both, producing the trio of Daniel Bard, Mark Melancon and Andrew Bailey as solutions.

We said it then and we'll repeat it now: strike one, strike two, strike three.

But then, in some ways, the entire Red Sox season was dotted with dreadfully insufficient at-bats.

Without question, Cherington has his work cut out for him this offseason. The unloading of Josh Beckett, Carl Crawford, and Adrian Gonzalez was an enormous stroke of good fortune for the Red Sox, and nobody wants to see the Sox make similar mistakes with free agents like Josh Hamilton or Zack Greinke. Boston's best options this offseason may come on the trade market or in smaller, solid free-agent signings, making Cherington's role all the more critical. Red Sox acquisitions this winter will not be the result of them having the most money. They will be the result of scouting, evaluation, smarts.

Last winter, after all, the Sox might have had Edwin Jackson, Joe Saunders or Hiroki Kuroda on one-year contracts. Heck, they could have had Wei-Yin Chen. All of four of those pitchers contributed to playoff teams this seasons - and they are still contributing now.

By the end of games today, two more major league teams could be eliminated from the playoffs. As a result, a cast of potential managerial candidates may be available for interviews. However enamored the Sox may be with Farrell, Cherington should have had Plans B, C, D and E in place a long time ago, and he should have a list of suitable candidates in place so that he can act quickly and decisively with regard to the manager.

That decision, after all, is relatively easy compared to the ones Cherington faces on his roster this offseason.

And it is far, far less important.

Tony's Top 5

Favorite blog entries

The final chapter on Teixeira and How Red Sox pitchers work the strike zone Jan. 7, 2009 and July 17, 2009. Some actual reporting – an obsession with Mark Teixeira and the art of pitching.
For 2011 Red Sox, there was plenty of blame to go around Oct. 1, 2011. The disgraceful collapse of the Red Sox stoked the fire in all of us.
Behind Garnett and James, Celtics and Heat are digging in June 4, 2012. Improbably, the Celtics pushed the Heat to the limit.
Thrill is back for Patriots Jan. 30, 2012. Another Super Bowl has even Bill Belichick musing.
You’ve got to believe June 15, 2011. On the morning of Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals, we all had reason to believe.
Updated: Mar 1, 07:24 AM

About Mazz

Tony Massarotti is a Globe sportswriter and has been writing about sports in Boston for the last 19 years. A lifelong Bostonian, Massarotti graduated from Waltham High School and Tufts University. He was voted the Massachusetts Sportswriter of the Year by his peers in 2000 and 2008 and has been a finalist for the award on several other occasions. This blog won a 2008 EPpy award for "Best Sports Blog".

Talk to Mazz