PDA

View Full Version : Rogers Doesn't Care For Ventura Hire


Lip Man 1
10-06-2011, 11:57 PM
Has some strong words:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/ct-spt-1007-rogers-ventura-white-sox-chicago--20111007,0,4441057.column

Lip

Tragg
10-07-2011, 12:00 AM
Gene Lamont didn't like it? What about Jerry Manuel, or Terry Bevington?

soltrain21
10-07-2011, 12:01 AM
The article isn't that bad. The stuff with Magglio is the most telling and a good sign.

DirtySox
10-07-2011, 12:03 AM
I don't completely disagree with him. It seems he's rather apprehensive about it, which is a fair reaction. We will see. If the team doesn't aim to be competing with the big boys next season, it really doesn't matter who is managing.

balke
10-07-2011, 12:07 AM
Haha. Ventura would be reason #20 kenny loses his job if he ever does. I survived Jerry Manuel. I do not fear any manager.

Plus, this will be a lot like a minor league team next year the way things are looking... so everyone can relax.

tebman
10-07-2011, 12:07 AM
It's hard for me to take Rogers' seriously. He seems more upset that he didn't know about it. This is the same guy who said that trading Brandon McCarthy for John Danks was "despicable". :rolleyes:

Sorry you missed your scoop, Phil.

central44
10-07-2011, 12:08 AM
I get the sense that he's disappointed it wasn't Tony La Russa. He's been pushing that idea ever since Ozzie left.

soltrain21
10-07-2011, 12:09 AM
It's hard for me to take Rogers' seriously. He seems more upset that he didn't know about it. This is the same guy who said that trading Brandon McCarthy for John Danks was "despicable". :rolleyes:

Sorry you missed your scoop, Phil.

Isn't he also the dip**** who figures out who won a trade by the number of people traded?

tebman
10-07-2011, 12:18 AM
It's hard for me to take Rogers' seriously. He seems more upset that he didn't know about it. This is the same guy who said that trading Brandon McCarthy for John Danks was "despicable". :rolleyes:

Sorry you missed your scoop, Phil.

Isn't he also the dip**** who figures out who won a trade by the number of people traded?

Yeah. . .well, he's on a deadline, I suppose, and he has to write something. I just don't have to read it.

(Also, before kittle42 comes after me, I apologize for the inadvertent apostrophe in my previous post. Mea culpa. :redface: )

TheOldRoman
10-07-2011, 12:31 AM
Isn't he also the dip**** who figures out who won a trade by the number of people traded?Yep. Carlos Gonzalez and Troy Tulowitski to the Sox for Dunn, Rios and AJ would be a win for the Rockies.

Fenway
10-07-2011, 12:39 AM
Gene Lamont didn't like it? What about Jerry Manuel, or Terry Bevington?

How about Joe McEwing who the Red Sox are looking at.

sullythered
10-07-2011, 12:44 AM
Well considering the fact that I'm pretty sure Phil Rogers suffers from Borderline Personality Disorder, I'm not so sure I put a whole lot of stock in his opinions.

tstrike2000
10-07-2011, 12:48 AM
Perhaps I'm wrong, but Rogers seems like a guy that was once respected by a lot of people, but has more or less now just become a windbag.

Fenway
10-07-2011, 12:55 AM
Ask any Tigers fan how Alan Trammell worked out.

Robin has NO experience... NONE

Big roll of the dice - and what was the rush - you don't need a manager right now.

SoxSpeed22
10-07-2011, 01:15 AM
Ask any Tigers fan how Alan Trammell worked out.

Robin has NO experience... NONE

Big roll of the dice - and what was the rush - you don't need a manager right now.At least they got Justin Verlander out of it. That's the same reason I don't hold anything against Jim Boylan. I agree with the timing of this hiring feeling abrupt. They can't hire until after the world series, but it's not like Robin was going to go anywhere else.

BainesHOF
10-07-2011, 02:46 AM
Rogers is a bad joke as a baseball writer. His opinion, positive or negative, is worthless.

I did enjoy his Jeff Cox mention. LOL!

Lip Man 1
10-07-2011, 02:58 AM
Supposedly the Sox did not want to do anything until some time next week but someone in the mainstream media got wind of this somehow and was prepared to break the story. The Sox felt they had to announce now to prempt him, from what I've been told tonight.

Lip

doublem23
10-07-2011, 07:17 AM
It's hard for me to take Rogers' seriously. He seems more upset that he didn't know about it. This is the same guy who said that trading Brandon McCarthy for John Danks was "despicable". :rolleyes:

Sorry you missed your scoop, Phil.

That's exactly what I got from that.

SURPRISE, PHIL, YOU DON'T KNOW **** :rolling:

FielderJones
10-07-2011, 11:32 AM
It's hard for me to take Rogers' seriously. He seems more upset that he didn't know about it. This is the same guy who said that trading Brandon McCarthy for John Danks was "despicable". :rolleyes:

Sorry you missed your scoop, Phil.

:thumbsup:

The fact that Rogers doesn't like this development gives me a good feeling that Robin is going to do just fine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Opposite

Milw
10-07-2011, 12:05 PM
Ask any Tigers fan how Alan Trammell worked out.

Robin has NO experience... NONE

Big roll of the dice - and what was the rush - you don't need a manager right now.
Trammell's rotation was Nate Cornejo, Mike Maroth, Jeremy Bonderman, Adam Bernero and Gary Knotts. His "closer" was Franklyn German. His best hitters were Dmitri Young and a pre-breakout Carlos Pena.

I'm not saying Trammell was a great manager, but it's not like he had much to work with.

Dan H
10-07-2011, 12:07 PM
I thought the article was pretty balanced even with the bias. I think Ventura's inexperience is an issue - not only in regards to him but that the Sox seem to always operate this way.

I am skeptical but not ready to jump off a bridge. I have little expectations for the team in 2012 anyway and almost anyone is a plus over Ozzie.

AZChiSoxFan
10-07-2011, 12:54 PM
It's hard for me to take Rogers' seriously. He seems more upset that he didn't know about it. This is the same guy who said that trading Brandon McCarthy for John Danks was "despicable". :rolleyes:

Sorry you missed your scoop, Phil.

Just curious, what did Phil have to say about trading away Gio for nothing? What did he have to say about giving away Hudson for nothing?

Lip Man 1
10-07-2011, 01:10 PM
He has been very clear that he thought the Hudson deal was a bad move however he wrote in one of his columns that the deal was a bad one because the Sox had no chance to win the division in 2010 so they didn't need an experienced pitcher.

I posted that according to Retrosheet.com the day the deal was announced the Sox had a game and a half lead in the division.

No chance?

Lip

doublem23
10-07-2011, 01:18 PM
Just curious, what did Phil have to say about trading away Gio for nothing? What did he have to say about giving away Hudson for nothing?

Who the hell cares, Rogers is a one-note bird. His only song and dance is to just criticize the hell out of everything and HEY, eventually you will be right, although I contend nobody should really miss Gio, as you can see by his home/road splits, when he's not pitching in that cavernous joke of a stadium the A's call home he's just an OK pitcher.

Unfortunately, I subject myself to his mindless bantering everyday on the train since I have a daily subscription to the Trib. He is an awful writer who probably is smarter than he gives off, but since he has to make the Trib some money, his usual pathetic rants and raves would come in somewhere around lower 1/3 of the crap that gets posted here.

tebman
10-07-2011, 01:39 PM
Who the hell cares, Rogers is a one-note bird. His only song and dance is to just criticize the hell out of everything and HEY, eventually you will be right, although I contend nobody should really miss Gio, as you can see by his home/road splits, when he's not pitching in that cavernous joke of a stadium the A's call home he's just an OK pitcher.

Unfortunately, I subject myself to his mindless bantering everyday on the train since I have a daily subscription to the Trib. He is an awful writer who probably is smarter than he gives off, but since he has to make the Trib some money, his usual pathetic rants and raves would come in somewhere around lower 1/3 of the crap that gets posted here.

I'm not a student of Rogers' extensive body of work, so I couldn't answer ASF's question about what Rogers said about the Hudson and Gonzalez trades. But the question made me curious so I dug around on Google.

Here's what Rogers had to say about the Hudson (http://archive.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/07/rogers-minus-dunn-trading-hudson-a-bad-move.html) deal, and here are his pithy words on the Gonzalez (http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/lofiversion/index.php?t62480.html) deal. To no one's surprise, he didn't like either one.

I don't think Rogers has an agenda other than to be reactive.

JC456
10-07-2011, 03:19 PM
Well, everyone is entitled to an opinion. All i can say, is the last manager had a resume of a World Series title and he couldn't even get his team to play .500 ball. So tell me how that experience helped win games? I like it and me and my family would be paying for tickets to watch this new team. I don't think Rogers has anything to lose! it is all on the White Sox and they sure don't seem bothered by it. Robin Ventura was a star player, one can only assume his talent included his thinking skills!

Lip Man 1
10-07-2011, 05:46 PM
Phil strongly believes the only way to really win consistently in baseball is through the minor league system. He's consistent in that attitude I'll give him that.

Lip

Frater Perdurabo
10-07-2011, 08:04 PM
Phil strongly believes the only way to really win consistently in baseball is through the minor league system. He's consistent in that attitude I'll give him that.

Lip

It's a sound strategy based on results. Over the past two decades, the Yankees and Braves consistently have produced excellent home-grown players, and those players have been key cogs in their long-term success. Yes, the Yankees also buy a ton of free agent talent, and have made shrewd deals, but their home-grown talent has been just as crucial to their success.

I think the Sox need leverage their "best market in the division" revenues into a building a results-oriented scouting and player development operation that produces quality major league players, while simultaneously signing long-term those home-grown players to form a nucleus, and making selective free agent acquisitions to fill holes.

Lip Man 1
10-07-2011, 11:00 PM
Frater:

I seriously doubt anything like you describe is going to take place until new ownership arrives on the scene.

Right or wrong the organization feels banking your hopes on minor league players isn't the way to go and they've shown that in their attitude and in what they spent on talent as well as international talent. (The Sox have almost zero presence in Latin America).

Lip

Bucky F. Dent
10-07-2011, 11:03 PM
Has some strong words:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/ct-spt-1007-rogers-ventura-white-sox-chicago--20111007,0,4441057.column

Lip


It's like the Good Housekeeping seal of approval.

TheVulture
10-07-2011, 11:05 PM
Not to mention, Rogers, as a professional writer, has 11th grade command of the English language at best.

Nellie_Fox
10-08-2011, 12:56 AM
Not to mention, Rogers, as a professional writer, has 11th grade command of the English language at best.I'm afraid that's becoming the rule rather than the exception.

StillMissOzzie
10-08-2011, 01:03 AM
I thought the article was pretty balanced even with the bias. I think Ventura's inexperience is an issue - not only in regards to him but that the Sox seem to always operate this way.

I am skeptical but not ready to jump off a bridge. I have little expectations for the team in 2012 anyway and almost anyone is a plus over Ozzie.

I thought he raised some legitimate issues and concerns. However, his closing statement (and I paraphrase here), "Is he being groomed or used?", left a bad taste in my mouth.
Just because his boy Quade paid his dues in the minor leagues doesn't mean he wasn't being used by his beloved Cubs, who needed a 1-2 year place holder who would work for cheap.

SMO
:gulp:

Dan H
10-08-2011, 09:21 AM
I thought he raised some legitimate issues and concerns. However, his closing statement (and I paraphrase here), "Is he being groomed or used?", left a bad taste in my mouth.
Just because his boy Quade paid his dues in the minor leagues doesn't mean he wasn't being used by his beloved Cubs, who needed a 1-2 year place holder who would work for cheap.

SMO
:gulp:

I agree with you on that last statement about the possibility of Ventura being used. It didn't go with the rest of the story. Used in what way? And what does that have to do with the issue of experience? And if Ventura is just holding the spot for someone else just is that someone esle? An editor should have deleted that last sentence.

SOXSINCE'70
10-08-2011, 09:26 AM
I survived Jerry Manuel.

I survived Don Kessinger,Larry Doby,Bob Lemon and Berry Tevington.:D:
Don't ask me how, but I survived them.

SOXSINCE'70
10-08-2011, 09:35 AM
An editor should have deleted that last sentence.

In a cost cutting measure, the sCrUB-Une has eliminated editors.:angry: