can we talk sox here for a second?

[flyingelvii]

Looks like Teddy may get his wish. A bunch of reports hinting that Tito's leaving today, possibly to Chicago. Because anytime you can get rid of a two-time World Series manager, you just have to make the move.

So you keep a manager because he won the world series in the past? Doesn't matter whether he is doing a good job? Or is your premise that winning the world series with the second highest payroll in baseball means that you are de facto a good manager?

Well he did more than any other Red Sox manager with a similar payroll. And he has done a good job over the last 8 years. As evidenced by two World Series. I also find it funny that nobody was bitching about him being a bad manager at the beginning of September.

[twballgame9]

Looks like Teddy may get his wish. A bunch of reports hinting that Tito's leaving today, possibly to Chicago. Because anytime you can get rid of a two-time World Series manager, you just have to make the move.

So you keep a manager because he won the world series in the past? Doesn't matter whether he is doing a good job? Or is your premise that winning the world series with the second highest payroll in baseball means that you are de facto a good manager?

Well he did more than any other Red Sox manager with a similar payroll. And he has done a good job over the last 8 years. As evidenced by two World Series. I also find it funny that nobody was bitching about him being a bad manager at the beginning of September.

I've been bitching about his managing for 8 years.

And no Red Sox manager ever had a payroll like that, except for Grady Little for one season. The Red Sox did not start the arms race with the Yankees until Henry bought the team. Prior to that, the Sox spent about half as much money - Pedro Martinez and a boat load of bargains. Even Garciaparra never had a big contract, and Mo Vaughn left because the Sox wouldn't pay him.

And think about how close Grady Little was to being unfireable by your standard.

[flyingelvii]

Yeah, Manny played for pennies. Same for Jose Offerman. Who could forget David Cone's great year? How about Carl Everett? Mike Lansing and Dante Bichette were clearly gotten on the cheap. They paid for big money players, they just sucked.

And that's a cute strawman with Grady. Keep going down that slippery slope. No logic flaw in that one.

[twballgame9]

The Red Sox payroll in 1999 was $70 million, 6th behind NYY, Cleveland, Baltimore, Texas and Atlanta and barely more than the Mets, Dodgers and Arizona. That was an increase from 1998, when it was $59 million, when they were 6th. In 2000, they were 7th.

In 2001, they were second, but were still in close range with the Dodgers, Mets, Cleveland, Atlanta and Texas.

Henry buys the team in January 2002. Last year of Grady Little, 2003, the Red Sox payroll ranks 6th, behind the Rangers, Dodgers, Mets, Yankees and Texas. This lasts one year of Henry's reign, and as Francona takes over in 2004, the Sox payroll jumps to second at $125 million, or $25 million more than third. In 2005 and 2006, they are $20 million more than third, and in 2007, they jump to $145 million, $30 million more than third, and narrowing the gap with the Yankees by $30 million.

It is not until 2008 and 2009 that Cubs, Mets and Tigers catch up, and the Red Sox cut payroll to 4th. By 2010, they are back to $160, $15 million more than 3rd. This year, the Phillies passed them, but they remained $20 million ahead of 4th.

Fact is that the Red Sox were traditionally in a group of teams from 5-8 in payroll in the 1990s through 2003 and a great many teams were in basically the same range. From 2004 to 2007, the Red Sox were well out in front of everyone but the Yankees, and they won 2 world series titles.

[Shredder]

I hear you on Schilling, but I think he would tone it down with the players. I don't think he is a candidate, but if he were named manager I would worry more about him being buddies with the guys he played with.

Martinez falls in the same category with Hale. He's been a bench coach in Tampa for a while now.

Re Schilling, you couldn't possibly have Wakefield in mind, could you? That would be a disaster. Speaking of which, I wonder if him and/or Varitek will be back. I'll put it at 25% for Wake and 50% for the Cap'n.

The difference between Hale and Martinez is that I believe Hale had extensive minor league managing experience before he was hired as 3B coach with the Sox.

I put Wake at 0% and Tek at 25% but if I were GM, I wouldn't bring him back. You can't rely on old, oft-injured players. I'd also shop Youk and Lowrie and look for a solid, durable third baseman. Ortiz will probably come back as there isn't as much of a market for him as he thinks but it'd likely be for a year because they're probably going to want flexibility at DH in the coming years. With Papelbon, you'd think he'd be back because teams should have learned from others' mistakes that big contracts for closers not named Mariano are bad news but there are dumb signings every year.

[twballgame9]

And that's a cute strawman with Grady. Keep going down that slippery slope. No logic flaw in that one.

Try this one on for size - is Ozzie Guillen a good manager?

[flyingelvii]

No. He's also only made the playoffs twice despite having one of the highest payrolls and playing in a significantly weaker division than the AL East. Keep 'em coming.

[flyingelvii]

Because he's an aliass of Rico Petrocelli.

[twballgame9]

No. He's also only made the playoffs twice despite having one of the highest payrolls and playing in a significantly weaker division than the AL East. Keep 'em coming.

Just wanted to make sure that a guy that wins the World Series can still be a bad manager. CONFIRMED!

[flyingelvii]

No. He's also only made the playoffs twice despite having one of the highest payrolls and playing in a significantly weaker division than the AL East. Keep 'em coming.

Just wanted to make sure that a guy that wins the World Series can still be a bad manager. CONFIRMED!

Sweet you took the most basic part of my argument and transformed it into the driving part of my argument. And you wonder why the world hates lawyers.

[twballgame9]

No. He's also only made the playoffs twice despite having one of the highest payrolls and playing in a significantly weaker division than the AL East. Keep 'em coming.

Just wanted to make sure that a guy that wins the World Series can still be a bad manager. CONFIRMED!

Sweet you took the most basic part of my argument and transformed it into the driving part of my argument. And you wonder why the world hates lawyers.

Your original argument was nothing more than a snide "anytime you can get rid of a two time world series champion manager, you have to do it."

You later decided he did more than any other Sox manager with a similar payroll, a factual inaccuracy, even accounting for inflation in baseball payrolls.

I must have missed the rest of your argument.

[flyingelvii]

No. He's also only made the playoffs twice despite having one of the highest payrolls and playing in a significantly weaker division than the AL East. Keep 'em coming.

Just wanted to make sure that a guy that wins the World Series can still be a bad manager. CONFIRMED!

Sweet you took the most basic part of my argument and transformed it into the driving part of my argument. And you wonder why the world hates lawyers.

Your original argument was nothing more than a snide "anytime you can get rid of a two time world series champion manager, you have to do it."

You later decided he did more than any other Sox manager with a similar payroll, a factual inaccuracy, even accounting for inflation in baseball payrolls.

I must have missed the rest of your argument.

Oh, I apologize, you just chose to attribute a frustration-based post to my core argument. For fucks sake, I broke down the Columbus Blue Jackets today. You should know I don't let it slide that easily. That said, you set the hook out and I am clearly going to bite and have fun carving your piss poor argument to pieces, IB style.

Yes, Francona has not done better than a manager with a similar payroll. He also hasn't done worse. There is no precedence for the payroll he has. So, yeah, that argument falls entirely flat since you have nothing to compare it to. He also had 6 seasons of 90+ wins and won 89 and 86 in the other two, so yeah, the Sox were really doing their best Baltimore Orioles impression during his tenure. Of course the payroll argument is more of an indictment of Theo but that can of worms hasn't opened up yet. Extrapolating your argument (see it's fun when I do it too), Francona is responsible for Crawford sucking, Lackey being a waste of life, Youk having hernias and Jenks being fat and ineffective, among others.

That was certainly easier and less fun than I expected. I hope my use of the abstract wins metric doesn't confuse you like Adrian Gonzalez's September AVG, HR, and RBI did earlier in the thread.

Edit: Also, as a request, please point to the factual error regarding the payroll. And try to normalize the stats so they're comparable year over year. Because Jimy Williams' and Joe Kerrigan's 82 wins with a $114M roster isn't helping you out right now.

[twballgame9]

No. He's also only made the playoffs twice despite having one of the highest payrolls and playing in a significantly weaker division than the AL East. Keep 'em coming.

Just wanted to make sure that a guy that wins the World Series can still be a bad manager. CONFIRMED!

Sweet you took the most basic part of my argument and transformed it into the driving part of my argument. And you wonder why the world hates lawyers.

Your original argument was nothing more than a snide "anytime you can get rid of a two time world series champion manager, you have to do it."

You later decided he did more than any other Sox manager with a similar payroll, a factual inaccuracy, even accounting for inflation in baseball payrolls.

I must have missed the rest of your argument.

Oh, I apologize, you just chose to attribute a frustration-based post to my core argument. For fucks sake, I broke down the Columbus Blue Jackets today. You should know I don't let it slide that easily. That said, you set the hook out and I am clearly going to bite and have fun carving your piss poor argument to pieces, IB style.

Yes, Francona has not done better than a manager with a similar payroll. He also hasn't done worse. There is no precedence for the payroll he has. So, yeah, that argument falls entirely flat since you have nothing to compare it to. He also had 6 seasons of 90+ wins and won 89 and 86 in the other two, so yeah, the Sox were really doing their best Baltimore Orioles impression during his tenure. Of course the payroll argument is more of an indictment of Theo but that can of worms hasn't opened up yet. Extrapolating your argument (see it's fun when I do it too), Francona is responsible for Crawford sucking, Lackey being a waste of life, Youk having hernias and Jenks being fat and ineffective, among others.

That was certainly easier and less fun than I expected. I hope my use of the abstract wins metric doesn't confuse you like Adrian Gonzalez's September AVG, HR, and RBI did earlier in the thread.

Edit: Also, as a request, please point to the factual error regarding the payroll. And try to normalize the stats so they're comparable year over year. Because Jimy Williams' and Joe Kerrigan's 82 wins with a $114M roster isn't helping you out right now.

The payrolls are sufficiently normalized by noting that in all but two seasons of Francona, the Red Sox spent more than 10% more in payroll than any team other than the Yankees. The Red Sox were rarely higher than 5th in payroll prior to 2004. I don't need to calculate inflation, comparative analysis is sufficient to debunk the theory that Jimy Williams and Joe Kerrigan were working with the same kind of available talent.

And your straw man is cute, but I am not a Theo fan either. I am, however, a fan of John Henry's money, which has done an admirable job of covering the blatant deficiencies of both Theo and Francona.

[flyingelvii]

No. He's also only made the playoffs twice despite having one of the highest payrolls and playing in a significantly weaker division than the AL East. Keep 'em coming.

Just wanted to make sure that a guy that wins the World Series can still be a bad manager. CONFIRMED!

Sweet you took the most basic part of my argument and transformed it into the driving part of my argument. And you wonder why the world hates lawyers.

Your original argument was nothing more than a snide "anytime you can get rid of a two time world series champion manager, you have to do it."

You later decided he did more than any other Sox manager with a similar payroll, a factual inaccuracy, even accounting for inflation in baseball payrolls.

I must have missed the rest of your argument.

Oh, I apologize, you just chose to attribute a frustration-based post to my core argument. For fucks sake, I broke down the Columbus Blue Jackets today. You should know I don't let it slide that easily. That said, you set the hook out and I am clearly going to bite and have fun carving your piss poor argument to pieces, IB style.

Yes, Francona has not done better than a manager with a similar payroll. He also hasn't done worse. There is no precedence for the payroll he has. So, yeah, that argument falls entirely flat since you have nothing to compare it to. He also had 6 seasons of 90+ wins and won 89 and 86 in the other two, so yeah, the Sox were really doing their best Baltimore Orioles impression during his tenure. Of course the payroll argument is more of an indictment of Theo but that can of worms hasn't opened up yet. Extrapolating your argument (see it's fun when I do it too), Francona is responsible for Crawford sucking, Lackey being a waste of life, Youk having hernias and Jenks being fat and ineffective, among others.

That was certainly easier and less fun than I expected. I hope my use of the abstract wins metric doesn't confuse you like Adrian Gonzalez's September AVG, HR, and RBI did earlier in the thread.

Edit: Also, as a request, please point to the factual error regarding the payroll. And try to normalize the stats so they're comparable year over year. Because Jimy Williams' and Joe Kerrigan's 82 wins with a $114M roster isn't helping you out right now.

The payrolls are sufficiently normalized by noting that in all but two seasons of Francona, the Red Sox spent more than 10% more in payroll than any team other than the Yankees. The Red Sox were rarely higher than 5th in payroll prior to 2004. I don't need to calculate inflation, comparative analysis is sufficient to debunk the theory that Jimy Williams and Joe Kerrigan were working with the same kind of available talent.

And your straw man is cute, but I am not a Theo fan either. I am, however, a fan of John Henry's money, which has done an admirable job of covering the blatant deficiencies of both Theo and Francona.

Except when they were for the four preceding years:

1997 - 15th
1998 - 6th
1999 - 6th
2000 - 7th
2001 - 2nd/3rd (depending on which numbers you look at)
2002 - 2nd
2003 - 4th/5th

That was a nice effort though. So, 1997 aside, they were out of the top 5 for 3 of the 6 years above. In which they were 6th or 7th.

[twballgame9]

No. He's also only made the playoffs twice despite having one of the highest payrolls and playing in a significantly weaker division than the AL East. Keep 'em coming.

Just wanted to make sure that a guy that wins the World Series can still be a bad manager. CONFIRMED!

Sweet you took the most basic part of my argument and transformed it into the driving part of my argument. And you wonder why the world hates lawyers.

Your original argument was nothing more than a snide "anytime you can get rid of a two time world series champion manager, you have to do it."

You later decided he did more than any other Sox manager with a similar payroll, a factual inaccuracy, even accounting for inflation in baseball payrolls.

I must have missed the rest of your argument.

Oh, I apologize, you just chose to attribute a frustration-based post to my core argument. For fucks sake, I broke down the Columbus Blue Jackets today. You should know I don't let it slide that easily. That said, you set the hook out and I am clearly going to bite and have fun carving your piss poor argument to pieces, IB style.

Yes, Francona has not done better than a manager with a similar payroll. He also hasn't done worse. There is no precedence for the payroll he has. So, yeah, that argument falls entirely flat since you have nothing to compare it to. He also had 6 seasons of 90+ wins and won 89 and 86 in the other two, so yeah, the Sox were really doing their best Baltimore Orioles impression during his tenure. Of course the payroll argument is more of an indictment of Theo but that can of worms hasn't opened up yet. Extrapolating your argument (see it's fun when I do it too), Francona is responsible for Crawford sucking, Lackey being a waste of life, Youk having hernias and Jenks being fat and ineffective, among others.

That was certainly easier and less fun than I expected. I hope my use of the abstract wins metric doesn't confuse you like Adrian Gonzalez's September AVG, HR, and RBI did earlier in the thread.

Edit: Also, as a request, please point to the factual error regarding the payroll. And try to normalize the stats so they're comparable year over year. Because Jimy Williams' and Joe Kerrigan's 82 wins with a $114M roster isn't helping you out right now.

The payrolls are sufficiently normalized by noting that in all but two seasons of Francona, the Red Sox spent more than 10% more in payroll than any team other than the Yankees. The Red Sox were rarely higher than 5th in payroll prior to 2004. I don't need to calculate inflation, comparative analysis is sufficient to debunk the theory that Jimy Williams and Joe Kerrigan were working with the same kind of available talent.

And your straw man is cute, but I am not a Theo fan either. I am, however, a fan of John Henry's money, which has done an admirable job of covering the blatant deficiencies of both Theo and Francona.

Except when they were for the four preceding years:

1997 - 15th
1998 - 6th
1999 - 6th
2000 - 7th
2001 - 2nd/3rd (depending on which numbers you look at)
2002 - 2nd
2003 - 4th/5th

That was a nice effort though. So, 1997 aside, they were out of the top 5 for 3 of the 6 years above. In which they were 6th or 7th.

I already put the payroll numbers up. Sorry you missed the discussion. Also sorry that you missed the fact that from 2004-2007 they were at least $20 million more than the third place payroll. The Sox were second in payroll in 2004-2007 and 2010. They were third in 2008-09 and 2011. Otherwise, they have only been higher than 5th once.

And being in the top 5 with a group of 8-10 teams spending the same amount of money from 1998-2003 is a far cry from 2004-2007 when they were in the top 2 and spending $20+ million more than third (oh, and winning 2 titles because the manager was awesome). Yup no correlation between spending and winning in baseball at all.

[twballgame9]

The Red Sox payroll in 1999 was $70 million, 6th behind NYY, Cleveland, Baltimore, Texas and Atlanta and barely more than the Mets, Dodgers and Arizona. That was an increase from 1998, when it was $59 million, when they were 6th. In 2000, they were 7th.

In 2001, they were second, but were still in close range with the Dodgers, Mets, Cleveland, Atlanta and Texas.

Henry buys the team in January 2002. Last year of Grady Little, 2003, the Red Sox payroll ranks 6th, behind the Rangers, Dodgers, Mets, Yankees and Texas. This lasts one year of Henry's reign, and as Francona takes over in 2004, the Sox payroll jumps to second at $125 million, or $25 million more than third. In 2005 and 2006, they are $20 million more than third, and in 2007, they jump to $145 million, $30 million more than third, and narrowing the gap with the Yankees by $30 million.

It is not until 2008 and 2009 that Cubs, Mets and Tigers catch up, and the Red Sox cut payroll to 4th. By 2010, they are back to $160, $15 million more than 3rd. This year, the Phillies passed them, but they remained $20 million ahead of 4th.

Fact is that the Red Sox were traditionally in a group of teams from 5-8 in payroll in the 1990s through 2003 and a great many teams were in basically the same range. From 2004 to 2007, the Red Sox were well out in front of everyone but the Yankees, and they won 2 world series titles.

[flyingelvii]

No. He's also only made the playoffs twice despite having one of the highest payrolls and playing in a significantly weaker division than the AL East. Keep 'em coming.

Just wanted to make sure that a guy that wins the World Series can still be a bad manager. CONFIRMED!

Sweet you took the most basic part of my argument and transformed it into the driving part of my argument. And you wonder why the world hates lawyers.

Your original argument was nothing more than a snide "anytime you can get rid of a two time world series champion manager, you have to do it."

You later decided he did more than any other Sox manager with a similar payroll, a factual inaccuracy, even accounting for inflation in baseball payrolls.

I must have missed the rest of your argument.

Oh, I apologize, you just chose to attribute a frustration-based post to my core argument. For fucks sake, I broke down the Columbus Blue Jackets today. You should know I don't let it slide that easily. That said, you set the hook out and I am clearly going to bite and have fun carving your piss poor argument to pieces, IB style.

Yes, Francona has not done better than a manager with a similar payroll. He also hasn't done worse. There is no precedence for the payroll he has. So, yeah, that argument falls entirely flat since you have nothing to compare it to. He also had 6 seasons of 90+ wins and won 89 and 86 in the other two, so yeah, the Sox were really doing their best Baltimore Orioles impression during his tenure. Of course the payroll argument is more of an indictment of Theo but that can of worms hasn't opened up yet. Extrapolating your argument (see it's fun when I do it too), Francona is responsible for Crawford sucking, Lackey being a waste of life, Youk having hernias and Jenks being fat and ineffective, among others.

That was certainly easier and less fun than I expected. I hope my use of the abstract wins metric doesn't confuse you like Adrian Gonzalez's September AVG, HR, and RBI did earlier in the thread.

Edit: Also, as a request, please point to the factual error regarding the payroll. And try to normalize the stats so they're comparable year over year. Because Jimy Williams' and Joe Kerrigan's 82 wins with a $114M roster isn't helping you out right now.

The payrolls are sufficiently normalized by noting that in all but two seasons of Francona, the Red Sox spent more than 10% more in payroll than any team other than the Yankees. The Red Sox were rarely higher than 5th in payroll prior to 2004. I don't need to calculate inflation, comparative analysis is sufficient to debunk the theory that Jimy Williams and Joe Kerrigan were working with the same kind of available talent.

And your straw man is cute, but I am not a Theo fan either. I am, however, a fan of John Henry's money, which has done an admirable job of covering the blatant deficiencies of both Theo and Francona.

Except when they were for the four preceding years:

1997 - 15th
1998 - 6th
1999 - 6th
2000 - 7th
2001 - 2nd/3rd (depending on which numbers you look at)
2002 - 2nd
2003 - 4th/5th

That was a nice effort though. So, 1997 aside, they were out of the top 5 for 3 of the 6 years above. In which they were 6th or 7th.

I already put the payroll numbers up. Sorry you missed the discussion. Also sorry that you missed the fact that from 2004-2007 they were at least $20 million more than the third place payroll. The Sox were second in payroll in 2004-2007 and 2010. They were third in 2008-09 and 2011. Otherwise, they have only been higher than 5th once.

And being in the top 5 with a group of 8-10 teams spending the same amount of money from 1998-2003 is a far cry from 2004-2007 when they were in the top 2 and spending $20+ million more than third (oh, and winning 2 titles because the manager was awesome). Yup no correlation between spending and winning in baseball at all.

Thanks for pointing that post out because I honestly did miss it back last page. Still, I take umbrage with you assertion that no Red Sox manager has done worse with such a large payroll (something like that...don't feel like going back). That is true. But the opposite is true in that nobody has done better. The design of the argument is inherently flawed and has been one of the things eating at my craw.

Given the stories that are starting to come out now about the clubhouse and Tito seemingly losing it, I don't think it's the worst thing in the world that both parted ways. Very rarely do you see a Bobby Cox-like tenure. But when you have a high-profile team that plays in a pressure cooker like the Red Sox do in Boston, especially considering the hacks that come from major media outlets here, managing personalities, protecting them from the media and all that other seemingly ancillary nonsense is arguably as important as managing the actual games. Of course they're not 1 for 1 equal but it's a pretty damn big part of the job. Probably the only comparables are the Yankees and maybe the Mets and Cubs, though those fanbases are largely more apathetic in nature due to futility than those of the Yankees and Red Sox.

So while there certainly is correlation between winning and spending, though Mets and Cubs fans would probably argue otherwise, I think that falls more on the GM than the manager. Theo has done a pretty pisspoor job of FA spending aside from his first couple of years. To blame Francona because he had three bullpen arms at best this year, among other issues, is somewhat misguided IMO.

There's a thought somewhere in that mismash.

[twballgame9]

1. I have no dispute with your assertion that Theo has done a pretty piss poor job, especially with the pitching.

2. I have no dispute with your assertion that it is hard to manage in Boston.

3. I am willing to accept that Francona did a good job in the clubhouse. My problem with Francona remains the two primary things for which a manager is responsible on the field: the bullpen and the baserunning. I know we are in firm philosophical disagreement about the nature of the game and the efficacy of the stolen base and hit and run, as well as whether the IP stat translates to "preserving the bullpen", so this horse has been beaten.

In short, I think Francona is probably a good "manager" but that he is a moron from the point at which the lineup cards are filled out. I think that having a $160 million payroll goes a long way towards covering that fact when the average fan looks at the wins and losses alone. And yes, I think that money covers a ton of the GM's deficiencies as well. Not suggesting that the Red Sox should have 5 world series instead of 2, just suggesting that the overall performance of the team does not equate to the level of money spent and talent obtained over the past 8 years.

[Hawkaroo]

Since we are talking Sox here, I'd like to welcome the next great manager for the White Sox, Robin Ventura. Good luck to you Robin. Put it on the board.

[pick6pedro]

Since we are talking Sox here, I'd like to welcome the next great manager for the White Sox, Robin Ventura. Good luck to you Robin. Put it on the board.

Not sure I'd be able to respect a guy who got pummelled by a man 20 years his senior.

[flyingelvii]

Since we are talking Sox here, I'd like to welcome the next great manager for the White Sox, Robin Ventura. Good luck to you Robin. Put it on the board.

Not sure I'd be able to respect a guy who got pummelled by a man 20 years his senior.

At least the first trip to Arlington will be fun with Nolan sitting in his front row seat.

[shockdoct]

Looks like Hohler has moved on from his semi-annual BC bashing article.

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/r ... _collapse/

[Cadillac90]

It's looking like Epstein to the Cubs is close to being done. As a Cubs fan, can you Sox fans tell me why Theo sucks and will flop as the Cubs' GM?

[flyingelvii]

He's poor with FA signings but good with the farm system and has shown an ability to keep his key guys that come up through the system at contracts that are at or below market rate (Youk, Pedroia, Lester, Buchholz, etc.).

[bignick33]

The narcissism of how the Red Sox ownership approaches PR can be very off-putting sometimes.

[eepstein0]

It's looking like Epstein to the Cubs is close to being done. As a Cubs fan, can you Sox fans tell me why Theo sucks and will flop as the Cubs' GM?

The Cubs have also been awful in FA so at least it'll be consistent.

[bignick33]

The narcissism of how the Red Sox ownership approaches PR can be very off-putting sometimes.

Well...it sounds like long-time Red Sox writer Gordon Edes is on the same page as me. Taken as a whole, this is pretty damning.

BOSTON -- Terry Francona is paying a dear price for deviating, however briefly, from the script.

He was supposed to say the decision to end his eight-year run as Red Sox manager was all his, and leave it at that. Instead, he said that he wasn't sure ownership had his back, suggesting that the reason he walked out the door was because it was held wide open for him.

Well, that obviously didn't sit well with some people in the highest reaches of Sox management, for now we are told in Wednesday's editions of the Boston Globe that not only did the Red Sox collapse in September, but that Francona's troubled marriage and his use of pain medication may have been contributing factors.

This is how it's done, Tito, Boston-style. No one ever escapes clean, regardless of what you might have accomplished here. (See Garciaparra, Nomar, 2004.)

On Sept. 2, when the Red Sox held a nine-game lead in the wild card over the Tampa Bay Rays, no one was talking about Francona's alleged issues with his wife. That was considered his private business. What a concept.

But "team sources" somehow were able to link Red Sox starters' ERA of 7.08 in September -- almost a full run higher than the next worst starters' ERA in the league (6.09, Orioles) -- to the fact that Francona spent some nights in a Brookline hotel instead of in his home. This, even though the Sox went 81-42 over a four-month stretch during which Francona was ordering room service.

Never mind that if job performance was measured by healthy marriages, this country would be in huge trouble, given the high divorce rate. Or that if baseball teams were required only to use players free from marital discord, many would be hard-pressed to fill their lineup cards.

Funny, but when owner John W. Henry filed for divorce from his second wife, no one raised the issue of whether he was distracted from his money management business or his ballclub. And wouldn't you know, the year he filed, 2007, the Red Sox won their second World Series on his watch.

Could Francona's personal issues have contributed to his decision not to fight to stay in Boston? He said as much, without going into detail. Would we have heard about them in anywhere but the gossip pages if the Sox were in the playoffs now? Of course not.

Perhaps even more harmful to Francona, and his future job prospects, were "team sources" expressing concerns to the Globe about his use of pain medication, the implication that the manager may have been abusing that medication.

Such information could only have been known by a very few -- Francona's employers, and his doctors and trainers. That either party would share such sensitive material certainly smells like a breach of patient confidentiality; Francona's lawyer might one day argue as much.

The Globe contacted Francona about the team's alleged concerns. Francona, according to the story, reacted strongly, noting that he has used pain medication for years due to knee and back issues stemming from the double-digit knee surgeries he has had, including knee replacements.

"I went and saw the proper people and it was not an issue,'' Francona said of his use of pain medication. "It never became an issue, and anybody who knew what was going on knows that.''

Makes you wonder how much trust Sox players will have in their medical staff going forward, knowing that any issues they might have could be fair game for public consumption.

It evidently was not enough for Francona to acknowledge that he was unable to impact the clubhouse culture the way he once had, to take responsibility for a breakdown of accountability and an absence of leadership that transformed a dream season into a nightmare he was unable to prevent. All legitimate reasons for Sox ownership to be disinclined to exercise the two-year option they held on his contract.

And Francona, in his farewell press conference, acknowledged there were "personal" issues that also made him feel like coming back might not have been the best course for either side.

But the slime bucket is never far from reach on Yawkey Way, as Francona is learning first-hand. Reached by Joe McDonald of ESPNBoston.com Wednesday morning, Francona declined comment.

He is through with Boston, even if "team sources" may not be through skewering him. Francona in the end took it from all sides -- from the players who violated his trust, from the players who did not intervene like they do on winning teams and call the miscreants to account, to the highest levels of management whose sense of decency apparently went on hiatus at the end.

"I think people are starting to recognize there's a pattern here. All of a sudden it becomes personal, especially with guys who have had so much success in that uniform," Garciaparra said on "SportsCenter" Wednesday.

"If we want to go down the list ... now we're hearing about Terry Francona, before Terry ... it was Johnny Damon, before him you had Derek Lowe, you had Pedro Martinez, you had Manny Ramirez, you had myself, then you had Mo Vaughn, then you had Roger Clemens, then you had Jim Rice, Carl Yastrzemski, and oh, by the way, one Ted Williams.

"So the list is pretty good, pretty prestigious, but it seems to happen. So there's a pattern. Is it all these guys that are bad or is there something more here?"

Gordon Edes covered the Red Sox for ESPNBoston.com.

http://espn.go.com/boston/mlb/story/_/i ... r-campaign

[twballgame9]

Can't say that the loss of either Theo or Francona bothers me too much, but the Red Sox PR machine is disgusting.

[pick6pedro]

but the Red Sox PR machine is disgusting.

Agreed. He claims it might not have been one-sided (which is the truth, correct?), so you counter with pill-popping and wife problems. Low.

[claver2010]

Papi to the Yanks?

They were talking about it on the fan this morning. The Yanks are going to have DH pretty well taken care of for 2012 between ARod/Jeter/Jesus, but would most certainly be interesting with that short porch.