PDA

View Full Version : Jeff Manto


Brian26
06-16-2013, 05:55 PM
Does Manto deserve any of the blame in this mess?

How does he compare to Walker?

LITTLE NELL
06-16-2013, 06:05 PM
Manto and Walker before him are not the problem, you can't teach stupid players how to hit. Ted Williams couldn't fix our guys.

Noneck
06-16-2013, 06:06 PM
You cant make a silk purse out of a sows ear.

Crestani
06-16-2013, 06:22 PM
Does Manto deserve any of the blame in this mess?

How does he compare to Walker?


What is really funny, (not really) is the crap Walker took and Manto has skated on this board all year...!!!:scratch:

RKMeibalane
06-16-2013, 06:36 PM
Manto and Walker before him are not the problem, you can't teach stupid players how to hit. Ted Williams couldn't fix our guys.

Not until his head thaws, anyway.

Tragg
06-16-2013, 06:43 PM
Since it's through 2 coaches that we can't hit and so many players take poor approaches, I tend to think it's the players and the organizational philosophy/teaching.

RKMeibalane
06-16-2013, 07:05 PM
Since it's through 2 coaches that we can't hit and so many players take poor approaches, I tend to think it's the players and the organizational philosophy/teaching.

This. People forget that these problems existed long before Walker and Manto were Sox coaches. Von Joshua and Gary Ward were fired within two years of each other.

SOXSINCE'70
06-16-2013, 07:14 PM
Ted Williams couldn't fix our guys.

Not until his head thaws, anyway.


Outside of the local nine's inablilty to play the game of baseball,this is the biggest laugh I've had all year.
:rolling::rolling::rolling:

SOXSINCE'70
06-16-2013, 07:15 PM
Von Joshua and Gary Ward were fired within two years of each other.

Don't forget "Papa Jack",Ron Jackson.

gobears1987
06-16-2013, 08:24 PM
All of the people who hated on Walker were just looking for a scapegoat. Walker was never the problem. The players are and always have been the issue. Well that and the GM who brought them in.

BainesHOF
06-16-2013, 09:18 PM
I've never seen Sox hitters look worse. If Manto isn't hurting, he sure isn't helping. His job is to help. He needs to go.

WhiteSox5187
06-16-2013, 10:05 PM
I've never seen Sox hitters look worse. If Manto isn't hurting, he sure isn't helping. His job is to help. He needs to go.

The problem goes way beyond Manto and went beyond Walker. This is an organizational problem that is systemic at every level, we don't value walks, hitting the other way, etc. If you can hit long homeruns, you will get promoted, it doesn't matter if you can't hit anything but a high 80s fastball down the middle.

Lip Man 1
06-16-2013, 11:13 PM
5187:

Well said.

Remember the old saying, "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink..."

The problem is the hitters and their eight hundred foot, seven run home run philosophy which seems to be the ONLY type of hitter Kenny and crew seem to like and / or get.

It's home run or nothing, station to station softball, the bane of this organization since 2000 with the notable exception of 2005 when they had balance....home run hitting AND speed AND guys who worked counts AND guys who went the other way.

Haven't had it before or since.

Lip

Jurr
06-17-2013, 06:03 AM
Yup, which is why I always HATED the Thome signing.

Is Thome a bad guy? Nope.
Is he a terrible baseball player? Absolutely not.

What he signified, though, was Kenny Williams' refusal to stick to a philosophy change.
I truly believe that NOT having a ton of power in the lineup makes you sharper as a team. You're looking to sacrifice. You're looking to execute a hit and run, because the three run homer isn't guaranteed.

Having guys like Thome and Dunn slow you down. You turn the brain volume down and stand at first or second base, hoping that they don't pull another ball right into the shift.

It's terrible baseball.

LITTLE NELL
06-17-2013, 06:19 AM
Some excellent points stated here but what bothers me is why we can see the problem and have for years but management doesn't see the problem.

kufram
06-17-2013, 08:08 AM
Seeing problems and fixing problems are two different things. One is easy.

In circumstances like we face now (i.e. an entire lineup failing), isn't it customary to fire the manager and hope you get a bump from the players under a new guy?

Calling everybody bums and stiffs is a little childish. Almost everybody is playing below their expected standard. Why is that?

I'm not sure 2005 was a great offense but I'll let the numbers guys argue about that. I think it did prove that doing the little things like moving runners, bunting, defense, etc. are as important as the big ones. We won a lot of 1 run games if I remember correctly, especially early in the season.

I think 2005 was a great team. People picked each other up.

doublem23
06-17-2013, 09:33 AM
I truly believe that NOT having a ton of power in the lineup makes you sharper as a team. You're looking to sacrifice. You're looking to execute a hit and run, because the three run homer isn't guaranteed.

Um, the 2013 White Sox don't have a ton of power in the lineup. This is the result.

Boondock Saint
06-17-2013, 10:03 AM
Um, the 2013 White Sox don't have a ton of power in the lineup. This is the result.

They don't have a ton of ability, either. I think Jurr has a bit of a point, that having several guys who can drill the ball out can be a hindrance to an offense. We've seen plenty of games since 2005 where our guys swing for the fences, and they spend nine innings either whiffing or popping the ball straight up. I think it'd be refreshing to see a team who can put a guy or two on with regularity, with that occasionally leading to an extended rally, as opposed to getting a guy on (probably with two already out), and praying that someone's got a double or HR in them, because who knows when the next time that we're going to have a baserunner is.

SoxSpeed22
06-17-2013, 10:06 AM
Not having a ton of power is okay, if you know how to hit everywhere else in the field. The problem is outside of home runs, the Sox hitters just aren't that good. Why they aren't that good is a whole different topic that could take about 60 pages to write up on.
My opinion on Walker, when he was fired, was that he wasn't the problem, but he sure as hell wasn't the solution. I feel the same way with Manto, I thought it was a lazy hire when it was made, and I agree that this points to bigger problems in the organization.

doublem23
06-17-2013, 10:17 AM
The problem goes way beyond Manto and went beyond Walker. This is an organizational problem that is systemic at every level, we don't value walks, hitting the other way, etc. If you can hit long homeruns, you will get promoted, it doesn't matter if you can't hit anything but a high 80s fastball down the middle.

Is it though? Walk's offense in Atlanta is basically a good version of the White Sox; low BA, low OBP, leads the NL in HR and K. He was still hitting coach for a lot of the guys on this roster, so who know how long his influence takes to wear off.

At any rate, Walk needed to be fired and it's looking like Manto needs to go, too. I agree with the overall point that maybe hitting coaches get too much credit when a team's good and too much blame when they're bad, and that it's ultimately on the players to perform, but clearly whatever these guys are doing, their players are not/have not responded. Time to try something new.

nsolo
06-17-2013, 10:39 AM
I'm not sure a change of hitting coach would make much difference, but after some thought, I agree that is should be done. At the very least, it sends a message to the players and the fans. That message being that management sees there's a problem. Would there be a difference in performance or add wins? Maybe.

Maybe what we really need is a fielding coach. Catching and throwing the ball are the essence of basic baseball skills. We are not good at it. Check that, we are terrible. Maybe invest in a base running coach, too.

I'm being tongue in check here, but nothing frustrates me more than not being able to catch the ball, throw the ball, and have enough head in the game to avoid stupid base running mistakes.

Back to a different hitting coach....is there a rule that says we can't hire a hitting coach who was an actual good major league hitter?

TaylorStSox
06-17-2013, 10:54 AM
It doesn't make much sense to play half your games at the Cell with a team that doesn't have any power. The park is a great place to hit home runs, but a bad place for singles and doubles hitters. The gaps play extremely small.

Foulke You
06-17-2013, 11:46 AM
It doesn't make much sense to play half your games at the Cell with a team that doesn't have any power. The park is a great place to hit home runs, but a bad place for singles and doubles hitters. The gaps play extremely small.
This is a fact that many people choose to ignore. I will never understand the "home runs are bad" crowd. We are losing because we are getting out slugged by most teams this year. If you build your lineup with nine Jeff Keppingers and Juan Pierres, you are going to get slaughtered in the American League especially the way our ballpark plays in the summer. Ask the Orioles, Rangers, or Red Sox if all those home runs are hurting their chances to win. The Sox rank 13th out of 15th in the AL in HRs. This is one of the big reasons they can't score.

russ99
06-17-2013, 12:04 PM
It doesn't make much sense to play half your games at the Cell with a team that doesn't have any power. The park is a great place to hit home runs, but a bad place for singles and doubles hitters. The gaps play extremely small.

Nobody denies that the Sox need to have a few sluggers to have an offense that plays well to the park. However, the games where that power is a bonus are a handful. Power is cut down substantially due to weather in April and mid-to-late September. So let's say our home dates when the weather is warm (so the ball sails more) and the wind isn't a crossbreeze, extra power is a good idea. So that's roughly 40-50 games out of 162.

Balance is needed. We don't have any. We have one good top of the order hitter in the worse slump of his career (Keppinger) a bunch of low-average/high strikeout power hitters and the rest are well below league average hitters.

My issue with Manto is the his philosophy of hitting: That we should be super-aggressive and swing at pitches early in the count. Considering the number of high-strikeout guys and hitters with poor approaches in the lineup, we should be taking pitches to get a favorable count. Also, we're 28th in walks. A few extra base runners could help...

How many of our K's this year are due to letting the pitcher get ahead in the count giving him a distinct advantage?

Domeshot17
06-17-2013, 12:05 PM
To add, Walker is the hitting coach in Atlanta right now, and I think they have a pretty decent offense.

It is the talent, not the coach, blame Kenny.

Saracen
06-17-2013, 12:39 PM
It always baffled me that Walker got the blame for a horrific lineup assembled by Kenny. This is an organizational problem, it doesn't matter who the batting coach is.

doublem23
06-17-2013, 12:55 PM
It always baffled me that Walker got the blame for a horrific lineup assembled by Kenny. This is an organizational problem, it doesn't matter who the batting coach is.

Hm, the Sox were 4th in runs in the AL last season, their first year sans Walker.

Look, he sucked and deserved to be fired. That doesn't mean every problem has been solved, but Walker was a problem.

Lip Man 1
06-17-2013, 01:13 PM
Nobody denies that the Sox need to have a few sluggers to have an offense that plays well to the park. However, the games where that power is a bonus are a handful. Power is cut down substantially due to weather in April and mid-to-late September. So let's say our home dates when the weather is warm (so the ball sails more) and the wind isn't a crossbreeze, extra power is a good idea. So that's roughly 40-50 games out of 162.

Balance is needed. We don't have any. We have one good top of the order hitter in the worse slump of his career (Keppinger) a bunch of low-average/high strikeout power hitters and the rest are well below league average hitters.


Russ:

Agree completely. Think you are exactly correct.

Nobody is saying power is bad, nobody is saying home runs are bad, nobody is saying you can't have home run hitters when you play half your games at U.S. Cellular Field.

What some folks are saying is you need some ways other than home runs to win games since nobody can guarantee the Sox are going to hit three home runs a game with a guy or two on base.

Balance isn't a dirty word folks.

Lip

doublem23
06-17-2013, 01:22 PM
Russ:

Agree completely. Think you are exactly correct.

Nobody is saying power is bad, nobody is saying home runs are bad, nobody is saying you can't have home run hitters when you play half your games at U.S. Cellular Field.

What some folks are saying is you need some ways other than home runs to win games since nobody can guarantee the Sox are going to hit three home runs a game with a guy or two on base.

Balance isn't a dirty word folks.

Lip

100% true except for the fact that no, somebody DID say that IN THIS VERY THREAD...


I truly believe that NOT having a ton of power in the lineup makes you sharper as a team. You're looking to sacrifice. You're looking to execute a hit and run, because the three run homer isn't guaranteed.

Having guys like Thome and Dunn slow you down. You turn the brain volume down and stand at first or second base, hoping that they don't pull another ball right into the shift.

It's terrible baseball.

I don't necessarily care what your opinions on how to build a baseball team are, that's all fine, just don't try this "uh, nobody said power was bad" BS when in fact, yeah, someone actually did. Don't give me this ****ing **** like we're responding to nobody.

TheVulture
06-17-2013, 01:24 PM
The funny thing is, those Walker teams actually could and did hit.

Lip Man 1
06-17-2013, 01:31 PM
100% true except for the fact that no, somebody DID say that IN THIS VERY THREAD...



I don't necessarily care what your opinions on how to build a baseball team are, that's all fine, just don't try this "uh, nobody said power was bad" BS when in fact, yeah, someone actually did. Don't give me this ****ing **** like we're responding to nobody.

OK Double fine.

I'm NOT SAYING and apparently Russ isn't saying that home runs are bad.

Does that make things better?

Jesus Christ this isn't life or death, we're not trying to score debate points here are we?

You're a smart guy, I think you know exactly what most folks are trying to say.

So there you go, you're right, I stand corrected and humbly ask your forgiveness.

Now can we get back to discussing baseball?

Many thanks.

Lip

TaylorStSox
06-17-2013, 01:52 PM
OK Double fine.

I'm NOT SAYING and apparently Russ isn't saying that home runs are bad.

Does that make things better?

Jesus Christ this isn't life or death, we're not trying to score debate points here are we?

You're a smart guy, I think you know exactly what most folks are trying to say.

So there you go, you're right, I stand corrected and humbly ask your forgiveness.

Now can we get back to discussing baseball?

Many thanks.

Lip

Only if we're bashing all things White Sox.

slavko
06-17-2013, 02:03 PM
Yup, which is why I always HATED the Thome signing.

Is Thome a bad guy? Nope.
Is he a terrible baseball player? Absolutely not.

What he signified, though, was Kenny Williams' refusal to stick to a philosophy change.
I truly believe that NOT having a ton of power in the lineup makes you sharper as a team. You're looking to sacrifice. You're looking to execute a hit and run, because the three run homer isn't guaranteed.

Having guys like Thome and Dunn slow you down. You turn the brain volume down and stand at first or second base, hoping that they don't pull another ball right into the shift.

It's terrible baseball.

But it's easier to throw money at power hitters than it is to build a team through perseverance, knowledge and craft. And once Kenny got the keys to the vault, he figured he had it made and let's face it, easier is the way people do their jobs if they think they have it made.

Except, of course, you and me.:smile:

TaylorStSox
06-17-2013, 02:06 PM
Oh Jesus. What was the winning percentage of Kenny Williams built teams and where did they finish in the AL? How were they compared to his predecessors?

Lip Man 1
06-17-2013, 03:00 PM
Am here visiting my wife in Seattle so I don't have my Sox media guide with me. I did look this up a few years ago and if I remember correctly, Kenny averaged 83 wins a season under his tenure.

He had a better winning percentage than Roland and Himes and a worse one (I think) than Scheueler.

As far as number of winning seasons, Kenny had eight (although he also had a lot more resources to work with), Himes had one (he was only here for four years), Roland had six if I remember. Scheuler had six.The best winning seasons however came under guys like Frank Lane and Ed Short.

Lip

JB98
06-17-2013, 03:46 PM
Basically, this is a team that is built to score with the home run. Problem is, they don't hit near enough home runs. Konerko's power is way down. Ramirez doesn't hit home runs anymore. Beckham has been out most of the year, and after a wrist injury, I don't think the Sox can count on 15 HRs from the 2B position this year. Viciedo doesn't look like he's going to match his production from last season either.

They aren't hitting home runs, and they are lost without them. A lumbering team that can't go first to third or second to home needs to have a good slugging percentage to score. The Sox will struggle unless they are hitting the ball off the wall or over it. Plain and simple. I think it's a personnel thing more than the coach, and I personally will not feel any better about the team if they fire Jeff Manto. Get rid of him if you want. I won't shed tears if they fire him either; I just don't think it will fix anything.

TaylorStSox
06-17-2013, 04:02 PM
Basically, this is a team that is built to score with the home run. Problem is, they don't hit near enough home runs. Konerko's power is way down. Ramirez doesn't hit home runs anymore. Beckham has been out most of the year, and after a wrist injury, I don't think the Sox can count on 15 HRs from the 2B position this year. Viciedo doesn't look like he's going to match his production from last season either.

They aren't hitting home runs, and they are lost without them. A lumbering team that can't go first to third or second to home needs to have a good slugging percentage to score. The Sox will struggle unless they are hitting the ball off the wall or over it. Plain and simple. I think it's a personnel thing more than the coach, and I personally will not feel any better about the team if they fire Jeff Manto. Get rid of him if you want. I won't shed tears if they fire him either; I just don't think it will fix anything.

Pretty much. When Paul Konerko is your DH and hitting clean up, you're screwed.

doublem23
06-17-2013, 04:15 PM
Pretty much. When 37-year-old Paul Konerko is your DH and hitting clean up, you're screwed.

Sorry had to add one last little bit in there

TaylorStSox
06-17-2013, 04:24 PM
Sorry had to add one last little bit in there

Thought it was implied. I expected a drop off, but he has to be one of the worst everyday players in the AL. Combine that with the players JB mentioned and, well, that's your 2013 Sox. I actually thought we'd have enough hitting. I thought Viciedo would improve, Flowers would hit for power and Ramirez would hit with a bat instead a toothpick.

doublem23
06-17-2013, 05:08 PM
Thought it was implied. I expected a drop off, but he has to be one of the worst everyday players in the AL. Combine that with the players JB mentioned and, well, that's your 2013 Sox. I actually thought we'd have enough hitting. I thought Viciedo would improve, Flowers would hit for power and Ramirez would hit with a bat instead a toothpick.

Well, just needed to make sure. You've seen what happens around here sometimes when people are left to imply things on their own.

Brian26
06-17-2013, 09:28 PM
This thread is unbelievable.

Lip...you dont need a media guide with you as long as you have an internet connection.

Anyone blaming Jim Thome for anything is way off the mark. Jim Thome replaced Carl Everett and helped the Sox win a lot more games over the next four years than he helped lose.

The second guessing of Kenny Williams is hilarious though. This guy gave the Sox every chance possible to win. Every season the dude was twisting Reinsdorf's arm for more money for deals. The players didn't always perform, but Kenny opened up an unprecedented window of opportunity for the Sox. To see a guy go after David Wells, Bartolo Colon, Thome, Dunn, Freddy Garcia, re-signing all the pitchers after 2005...I will take that 12 years and a World Title over anything Schueler or Hemond ever accomplished.

Lip Man 1
06-17-2013, 11:22 PM
Brian:

I like to have things in front of me that I don't have to sort through to find or hit refresh at times. This was one of them. I'm pretty familiar with the Sox media guide so I can find what I need in a flash.

Feel free if you wish though to check and see how accurate my memory was.

Hemond by the way, in my opinion was the finest GM the Sox ever had because no GM was as badly behind the eight ball as he was when he took over in September 1970. The Sox literally were in worse shape than the expansion franchises and no Sox GM had to go through the financial issues with ownership like he did having to deal with Art Allyn, John Allyn and Bill Veeck.

When he actually had a little stability and money to work with he put together the 83 club. Wonder what he might have accomplished had he had those resources his entire Sox career.

I'd say Kenny is probably the 3rd best GM in my opinion behind Roland and Frank Lane and ahead of Ed Short and Scheueler.

Lip

Tragg
06-17-2013, 11:24 PM
Am here visiting my wife in Seattle so I don't have my Sox media guide with me. I did look this up a few years ago and if I remember correctly, Kenny averaged 83 wins a season under his tenure.

He had a better winning percentage than Roland and Himes and a worse one (I think) than Scheueler.

As far as number of winning seasons, Kenny had eight (although he also had a lot more resources to work with), Himes had one (he was only here for four years), Roland had six if I remember. Scheuler had six.The best winning seasons however came under guys like Frank Lane and Ed Short.

Lip

Roland and Himes took over losers. Williams and Scheuler took over a winner. Not surprising their W/L percentage is better. But Williams won a WS.

TaylorStSox
06-17-2013, 11:45 PM
This thread is unbelievable.

Lip...you dont need a media guide with you as long as you have an internet connection.

Anyone blaming Jim Thome for anything is way off the mark. Jim Thome replaced Carl Everett and helped the Sox win a lot more games over the next four years than he helped lose.

The second guessing of Kenny Williams is hilarious though. This guy gave the Sox every chance possible to win. Every season the dude was twisting Reinsdorf's arm for more money for deals. The players didn't always perform, but Kenny opened up an unprecedented window of opportunity for the Sox. To see a guy go after David Wells, Bartolo Colon, Thome, Dunn, Freddy Garcia, re-signing all the pitchers after 2005...I will take that 12 years and a World Title over anything Schueler or Hemond ever accomplished.

Some people just aren't happy if they're not crying. The same people that blast KW for being overly aggressive don't have the patience to wait on prospects. They complain when we had the best system in baseball and complain when we mortgage the future to win now. They complain when we draft system players to fill the back end of the rotation and they complain when we draft raw, toolsy outfielders. For a guy that couldn't identify talent, we still have a hell of a pitching staff that's mostly homegrown.

People should be happy KW tried to win at all costs. He struck out a lot, but hit some major league home runs. I, for one, will never take 2005 for granted. Generations of Sox fans lived long, fruitful lives and never witnessed what we were part of. To this day, it still feels great. I will always be grateful to KW for having the stones to trade a young power hitter for a AAAA speedster. For trading 2 big prospects for a lazy, sweaty, declining pitcher. For trading a 20 game winner for a Cuban that couldn't win the big game.

Complain all you want about the team right now, but lets not act like the guy didn't know what the hell he was doing.

Brian26
06-17-2013, 11:57 PM
2001-83
2002-81
03-86
04-83
05-99
06-90
07-72
08-89
09-79
10-88
11-79
12-85

Avg=84.5

Lip Man 1
06-17-2013, 11:58 PM
Taylor:

I also will never take the 2005 title for granted...with the White Sox that's as rare an accomplishment as a republican being elected mayor of the city of Chicago.

It is a shame however that organizations like the Marlins have won more World Series in a decade than the Sox have in almost a 100 year span and that every one of the original pre expansion franchises save for the Sox have actually made the post season in consecutive years.

Baseball is a funny game isn't it?

Lip

TaylorStSox
06-18-2013, 12:03 AM
Taylor:

I also will never take the 2005 title for granted...with the White Sox that's as rare an accomplishment as a republican being elected mayor of the city of Chicago.

It is a shame however that organizations like the Marlins have won more World Series in a decade than the Sox have in almost a 100 year span and that every one of the original pre expansion franchises save for the Sox have actually made the post season in consecutive years.

Baseball is a funny game isn't it?

Lip
They're tied with the Red Sox too. It is a funny game.

MISoxfan
06-18-2013, 12:53 AM
I wish we had a low BA high power offense, it would beat what we have now. It's a tough season when Alejandro De Aza has been your second most productive hitter.

BainesHOF
06-18-2013, 09:56 AM
Hemond was a great GM. He made astute trades. You don't have to just trade a veteran for a minor leaguer and hope it pays off down the road. An astute GM can receive major league talent in return. You improve by receiving more than you give up. If you do that enough, you're back in business. Of course, in order to trade successfully, you have to be a good talent evaluator. The Sox haven't even been able to evaluate talent to have average success in the draft for quite a long time now. That was Williams' downfall more than anything. It was comical to see the organizational promotions of a couple years ago of some people responsible for evaluating talent. They should have been fired.

WhiteSox5187
06-18-2013, 10:33 AM
Taylor:

I also will never take the 2005 title for granted...with the White Sox that's as rare an accomplishment as a republican being elected mayor of the city of Chicago.

It is a shame however that organizations like the Marlins have won more World Series in a decade than the Sox have in almost a 100 year span and that every one of the original pre expansion franchises save for the Sox have actually made the post season in consecutive years.

Baseball is a funny game isn't it?

Lip

The Marlins won more titles because they had a guy in charge who was/is one of the best GMs in baseball. We don't have that.

doublem23
06-18-2013, 12:09 PM
Guys, the Marlins just got lucky. They've made the playoffs twice and won the World Series both times. That's just good luck. But you can't logically throw the Marlins into the mix as "oh, why can't the Sox win like them?" and then turn around and complain that the Sox don't make the postseason enough because, uh, the Sox have made the playoffs more times than the Marlins since they were founded.

Lip Man 1
06-18-2013, 12:24 PM
There is truth in this but it's also true the Sox have played 112 seasons compared to the Marlins 20. I certainly would hope that the Sox would have made the playoffs more often given that they've had 92 more seasons to do so.

The comments got me to thinking so I did a little basic math, hope the figures are right.

The Marlins made the post season twice in 20 years, an average of once every 10 years.

The Sox have made the postseason nine times in 112 seasons an average of once every 18.5 years. I did not count the Sox winning the 1900 championship because at that time baseball didn't recognize the American League as a 'major' league or the number would have changed.

Lip

doublem23
06-18-2013, 12:31 PM
There is truth in this but it's also true the Sox have played 112 seasons compared to the Marlins 20. I certainly would hope that the Sox would have made the playoffs more often given that they've had 92 more seasons to do so.

The comments got me to thinking so I did a little basic math, hope the figures are right.

The Marlins made the post season twice in 20 years, an average of once every 10 years.

The Sox have made the postseason nine times in 112 seasons an average of once every 18.5 years. I did not count the Sox winning the 1900 championship because at that time baseball didn't recognize the American League as a 'major' league or the number would have changed.

Lip

I think that's a little misleading because A) the Marlins have played almost exclusively in the Wild Card era which has opened up postseason play. The bottom line is still that when comparing the two teams over an equal amount of time, the Sox have made more postseason appearances than the Marlins. Which leads to point B) who gives a **** about what happened in say... 1930? (Hint: Answer is nobody)

LITTLE NELL
06-18-2013, 12:38 PM
There is truth in this but it's also true the Sox have played 112 seasons compared to the Marlins 20. I certainly would hope that the Sox would have made the playoffs more often given that they've had 92 more seasons to do so.

The comments got me to thinking so I did a little basic math, hope the figures are right.

The Marlins made the post season twice in 20 years, an average of once every 10 years.

The Sox have made the postseason nine times in 112 seasons an average of once every 18.5 years. I did not count the Sox winning the 1900 championship because at that time baseball didn't recognize the American League as a 'major' league or the number would have changed.

Lip

Lip, 112 divided by 9 is 12.44. A little bit better than 18.5

Lip Man 1
06-18-2013, 12:44 PM
You're right Nell. Typo plus the fact that I just got up right before trying to figure this out.

It should be 12.5 years.

Double:

If nobody cares why does MLB keep those records? Obviously SOMEBODY does.

I really wish we could just get along Double, it's really getting exhausting going through **** like this seemingly in every single ****ing post with you.

Lip

doublem23
06-18-2013, 12:53 PM
You're right Nell. Typo plus the fact that I just got up right before trying to figure this out.

It should be 12.5 years.

Double:

If nobody cares why does MLB keep those records? Obviously SOMEBODY does.

I really wish we could just get along Double, it's really getting exhausting going through **** like this seemingly in every single ****ing post with you.

Lip

The point is do you sit up and toss and turn at night that the Sox finished last in the AL in 1931? No? Then what difference does it make. They're just numbers on paper at this point. I'm not going to get too emotionally invested in that.

dickallen15
06-18-2013, 01:16 PM
I think that's a little misleading because A) the Marlins have played almost exclusively in the Wild Card era which has opened up postseason play. The bottom line is still that when comparing the two teams over an equal amount of time, the Sox have made more postseason appearances than the Marlins. Which leads to point B) who gives a **** about what happened in say... 1930? (Hint: Answer is nobody)
Very misleading. The Marlins were the Wild Card both times they won. They have never won a division. Since the Wild Card Era, like you posted,the Sox have made the playoffs more often than the Marlins. In fact, the Sox have made the playoffs more often than the Marlins have in their history since the period after the Marlins first title, and have made the playoffs as much as the Marlins have in their history since the Marlins last appearance.

LITTLE NELL
06-18-2013, 03:03 PM
The point is do you sit up and toss and turn at night that the Sox finished last in the AL in 1931? No? Then what difference does it make. They're just numbers on paper at this point. I'm not going to get too emotionally invested in that.

I think if you were a Yankee fan you would be damn proud of their 27 World Series Championships, some of them won in the 20s and 30s. I feel damn good about the Sox beating the Cubs in the 1906 World Series and always bring it up to Cub fans when I want to give them a little dig.

doublem23
06-18-2013, 03:27 PM
I think if you were a Yankee fan you would be damn proud of their 27 World Series Championships, some of them won in the 20s and 30s. I feel damn good about the Sox beating the Cubs in the 1906 World Series and always bring it up to Cub fans when I want to give them a little dig.

Hm, if I want to dig at Cub fans I bring up this (http://www.jdbaseball.com/pictures/chicago-white-sox/white-sox-world-series-flag.jpg) and this (http://i2.ytimg.com/vi/m09GoUMaD0Q/mqdefault.jpg) first, not something that happened 107 years ago.

RKMeibalane
06-18-2013, 03:33 PM
I think if you were a Yankee fan you would be damn proud of their 27 World Series Championships, some of them won in the 20s and 30s. I feel damn good about the Sox beating the Cubs in the 1906 World Series and always bring it up to Cub fans when I want to give them a little dig.

Most Cubs fans probably can't even count back that far. Why would you bring up something so irrelevant just to win an argument with Cubs fans. They're nothing.

LITTLE NELL
06-18-2013, 03:43 PM
Most Cubs fans probably can't even count back that far. Why would you bring up something so irrelevant just to win an argument with Cubs fans. They're nothing.

The Sox beating the Cubs in the World Series regardless of when it happened is not irrelevant, it's part of our history.

SI1020
06-18-2013, 05:21 PM
I think that's a little misleading because A) the Marlins have played almost exclusively in the Wild Card era which has opened up postseason play. The bottom line is still that when comparing the two teams over an equal amount of time, the Sox have made more postseason appearances than the Marlins. Which leads to point B) who gives a **** about what happened in say... 1930? (Hint: Answer is nobody) Well then I'm nobody. I love the study of history, and baseball history is right up there near the top. I do get your point about comparing the history of the White Sox and Marlins from 1993 on, but I can't believe you would downplay the history and lore of the game of baseball.

slavko
06-18-2013, 05:42 PM
This is all a long way from Jeff Manto. If he adopted Manti T'eo, there would be a linebacker named Manti Manto. :smile:

RKMeibalane
06-18-2013, 06:08 PM
This is all a long way from Jeff Manto. If he adopted Manti T'eo, there would be a linebacker named Manti Manto. :smile:

Does he have a girlfriend?

nsolo
06-18-2013, 07:47 PM
Does he have a girlfriend?
Can she hit?

doublem23
06-18-2013, 08:18 PM
Well then I'm nobody. I love the study of history, and baseball history is right up there near the top. I do get your point about comparing the history of the White Sox and Marlins from 1993 on, but I can't believe you would downplay the history and lore of the game of baseball.

I mean, I also love reading about the history of the game and looking over old box scores and **** like that, but I'm not going to walk into some Cub fans' face and be all like 1906, MOTHER****ER.

RKMeibalane
06-18-2013, 08:53 PM
Can she hit?

She's struck people out before. :cool: