PDA

View Full Version : "Sun" Says Schueler The One


Lip Man 1
11-25-2002, 10:05 PM
The Baltimore "Sun" is reporting that former Sox GM Ron "Jumbotron" Schueler will be named the new GM of the Orioles perhaps as soon as next week.

If true, it'll be interesting to see how, if at all, it affects Frank Thomas' situation. Thomas has told the O's he'd like to play for them, with Jumbotron Ron in charge it could make for a partnership.

Lip

Daver
11-25-2002, 10:09 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
The Baltimore "Sun" is reporting that former Sox GM Ron "Jumbotron" Schueler will be named the new GM of the Orioles perhaps as soon as next week.

If true, it'll be interesting to see how, if at all, it affects Frank Thomas' situation. Thomas has told the O's he'd like to play for them, with Jumbotron Ron in charge it could make for a partnership.

Lip

With as screwed up as the Orioles are this takes the cake,the headline should read "Angelos Gaurantees Four More Years of Idiocy"

Those two bottom feeders deserve each other.

nut_stock
11-25-2002, 10:20 PM
Frank's not going to Baltimore. They had a real-audio file on baltimore's main web site where their beat writer basically said that they'd have to move a lot of salary before signing Frank. He mentioned that they're also still paying for Albert Belle. In addition, he said the O's already have a logjam of DH/1st base type players.

soxtalker
11-26-2002, 09:02 AM
If Schu is indeed about to be named GM in Baltimore, we might want to look at the implications for us beyond Big Frank. Schu knows the Sox system better than any other, and he will have his preferences among players. So, are there any potential trades on the horizon?

Daver
11-26-2002, 04:36 PM
Originally posted by soxtalker
If Schu is indeed about to be named GM in Baltimore, we might want to look at the implications for us beyond Big Frank. Schu knows the Sox system better than any other, and he will have his preferences among players. So, are there any potential trades on the horizon?

Ron Schueler lost control of draft decisions in 1999,he doesn't know the system as well as you think.

jeremyb1
11-27-2002, 01:14 AM
Originally posted by daver
With as screwed up as the Orioles are this takes the cake,the headline should read "Angelos Gaurantees Four More Years of Idiocy"

Those two bottom feeders deserve each other.

i can't believe people have hostility towards schu. i thought he was a great gm. he built a 95 win team on a 30 million dollar payroll in '00 and acquired charles johnson that year for fordyce and figeroa. his only major mistake i can think of was the navarro signing and whatever role he had in the ritchie deal. i say great for schu, great for the o's, and great for baseball.

HITMEN OF 77
11-27-2002, 12:22 PM
I too thought Scho was a decent GM. The Navarro deal was bad, real bad. We got hosed on that one. But other than that, I can't think of anything else. He made us smile for the first time since the '93 ALCS team in '00.

Lip Man 1
11-27-2002, 12:45 PM
Allow me to reintroduce you to "Jumbotron" Ron Schueler:

*Traded Sammy Sosa for George Bell

*Traded three players (including a young Bob Wickman) for
Steve Sax

* Traded Jack McDowell for three minor leaguers

Also Jumbo knowing that the Sox desperatly needed pitching help in the 2nd half of the aforementioned 2000 season refused to part with any of his "can't miss kids" even though Eldred was out, Baldwin had a bad shoulder (which caused him to miss a month) and late in the season both Sirotka and Parque got hurt.

Yea he was a GREAT GM , he did EXACTLY as his master Uncle Jerry commanded! (Keep that payroll down!!!)

Lip

FanOf14
11-27-2002, 01:14 PM
Lip, The only trade that you listed that I have a clear memory of (high school and other things kept me overly occupied and therefore don't remember much of what was going on with the Sox at that time) is the Sosa for Bell trade. Sosa was crappy up until that time. No one really seemed that sad that he was gone, he was a headcase that was a below average player from what I remember. The other two trades you listed, I can't remember alot of them so I can really say much of anything about them.

hold2dibber
11-27-2002, 01:28 PM
Originally posted by FanOf14
Lip, The only trade that you listed that I have a clear memory of (high school and other things kept me overly occupied and therefore don't remember much of what was going on with the Sox at that time) is the Sosa for Bell trade. Sosa was crappy up until that time. No one really seemed that sad that he was gone, he was a headcase that was a below average player from what I remember. The other two trades you listed, I can't remember alot of them so I can really say much of anything about them.

I think it is overly generous to a GM to consider only whether it seemed like a good trade at the time. It's a rough business, I know, but when you're a GM, the quality of your trades is judged in hindsight. GMs are paid a lot of money to make those trades and the only way to judge whether a GM has done a good job or not is to look at the trade in hindsight. And the Bell for Sosa deal, in hindsight, was an absolute disaster. You may quibble that the Sox really needed Bell's production at that time, or that Sosa wouldn't have become as good as he's become if he had stayed with the Sox, but that is, IMHO, a bunch of excuse-making. The trade was a disaster.

Now, I'm not saying that Schu was a horrible GM. I think he was okay. While Lip derides him for doing what JR said and keeping the payroll low, what the hell else was he supposed to do? He has to work under the constraints that JR set for him. And he was okay under those constraints. Lip rightly points out some crappy moves by Schu. But, off the top of my head, he also picked up guys like Tartabull, Burks and Franco for nothing, and all gave the Sox good production. He also was in charge of a system that developed some good players, like Sirotka, Parque, and Durham. The Fordyce for CJ trade was a good one. I'm sure there are others I'm forgetting.

Overall, I think he was okay, not good, not horrible, just okay.

hempsox
11-27-2002, 02:06 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
I think it is overly generous to a GM to consider only whether it seemed like a good trade at the time. It's a rough business, I know, but when you're a GM, the quality of your trades is judged in hindsight.

True but in the same fashion what would have happened to SamME had the Sox not traded him??? He could have become the next Dan Pasqua *smack*...oops gotta stop dreaming while I'm at work.

Now, I'm not saying that Schu was a horrible GM. I think he was okay. While Lip derides him for doing what JR said and keeping the payroll low, what the hell else was he supposed to do? He has to work under the constraints that JR set for him. And he was okay under those constraints. Lip rightly points out some crappy moves by Schu. But, off the top of my head, he also picked up guys like Tartabull, Burks and Franco for nothing, and all gave the Sox good production. He also was in charge of a system that developed some good players, like Sirotka, Parque, and Durham. The Fordyce for CJ trade was a good one. I'm sure there are others I'm forgetting.

You betcha...how about Navarro and Snyder for Manos and Eldred...or Garland for Karchner or most of the white flag trades which brought us the joy of watching Mike Caruso try to bunt his way on. Well at least we got Foulke in that one. The CJ trade was great and not resigning him was perhaps even better. We could have done much worse with another GM than Schu.

duke of dorwood
11-27-2002, 02:14 PM
Just look at what we have now, and you'll appreciate Schu a bit more. He was just as handicapped by Reinsdorf as Williams is. He just seemed to manage to get a little more without giving up a lot

Foulke You
11-27-2002, 03:00 PM
Schueler was an average GM in my opinion. The 2000 team was his crowning achievment but a lot of people give him credit for the '93 team when that team was largely built by GM Larry Himes. The key players on that team, namely Frank Thomas, Robin Ventura, and that lights out pitching staff were assembled by Himes. Schu inherited a great nucleus of talent to build on. Of course, KW also inherited a pretty good core and so far has been unable to do jack with it.

Schu had the advantage of leaving the Sox with a Division Championship team which left a good taste in our mouths about him. Not to mention the fact that when compared to KW he seems like a baseball genius but Schu had his shortcomings. I can't forget the disasterous '95-'97 seasons where we witnessed such great acquisitions of Jaime Navarro, Darren Lewis, Charlie O'Brien, and the immortal Chris Sabo. Our reward for those hodgepodge teams of bad veterans was the patience trying rebuilding years of '98-'99. And who did he appoint to head up the nightmare Sox teams from the mid '90s? Terry Bevington, whom he stuck with for almost 3 years! Then replaced him with the tinkerer Jerry Manuel who is more and more looking like a "point A to B" manager but not a "point B to C" type of guy. My overall grade for Schu's tenure was C+.

soxtalker
11-27-2002, 03:12 PM
I tend to think of Schu as a reasonably good GM, who made a few shrewd deals (e.g. Eldred) and built a pretty good farm system. (I'm assuming here that he has to work within the constraints that JR provides.) But a message string like this also makes me realize that I forget some of his early deals that turned out to be pretty bad. He made deals that gave away young players for "proven" veterans that would ensure a quick win. In the end, some of those veterans proved only to be on the bottom end of their careers, and some of the young players traded away turned into very good players. As Schu became more experienced, he seemed to be far less willing to make the big deal, relying more and more upon his farm system. I found it frustrating at times, but he did acquire some good veterans to fill in holes.

I wonder at times if we're not seeing in KW a repetition of the learning process that Schueler went through. (Well, maybe that's a hope.)

PaleHoseGeorge
11-27-2002, 03:42 PM
Originally posted by FanOf14
Lip, The only trade that you listed that I have a clear memory of (high school and other things kept me overly occupied and therefore don't remember much of what was going on with the Sox at that time) is the Sosa for Bell trade. Sosa was crappy up until that time. No one really seemed that sad that he was gone, he was a headcase that was a below average player from what I remember. The other two trades you listed, I can't remember alot of them so I can really say much of anything about them.

If I had any issue with Schu as a GM, it was his reluctance to do deals. Other GM's hated doing business with the Sox because Schu had a reputation for holding out for too much. Gee, wouldn't that be a refreshing change from the mope we have in the GM's seat today!

As for the Sosa trade, count me as someone who still thinks the trade was the right move. The Sox couldn't afford a strikeout machine like Sammy in the lineup. HE WAS TERRIBLE! We were a much better team after Sosa was traded, even with George Bell crapping out after one season.

We couldn't win division titles in 1993 and 1994 with Shammy striking out every fourth at-bat. The day Sosa wins a championship for the Flubbies is the day I change my mind about the value of the trade. I'm not too worried about that happening any time soon.

We're trying to win championships on this end of town. Let stupid Flub fans pull their puds about Shammy's zingers. They do that best anyway.

Foulke You
11-27-2002, 03:47 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
If I had any issue with Schu as a GM, it was his reluctance to do deals. Other GM's hated doing business with the Sox because Schu had a reputation for holding out for too much. Gee, wouldn't that be a refreshing change from the mope we have in the GM's seat today!

As for the Sosa trade, count me as someone who still thinks the trade was the right move. The Sox couldn't afford a strikeout machine like Sammy in the lineup. HE WAS TERRIBLE! We were a much better team after Sosa was traded, even with George Bell crapping out after one season.

We couldn't win division titles in 1993 and 1994 with Shammy striking out every fourth at-bat. The day Sosa wins a championship for the Flubbies is the day I change my mind about the value of the trade. I'm not too worried about that happening any time soon.

We're trying to win championships on this end of town. Let stupid Flub fans pull their puds about Shammy's zingers. They do that best anyway.

Couldn't have said it better. What's more annoying is that Cub fans seem to think that our hatred of Sosa is rooted in the fact that we are somehow jealous of them for "stealing" Sammy away and we are all just upset that he isn't on our team. We have won 2 division tites (3 if you count '94) since the Sosa trade and we have a better player RF in Maggs right now and the Cubs got a selfish one dimensional circus sideshow to complement the Wrigley circus tent! So how did that trade hurt us again?

hold2dibber
11-27-2002, 04:12 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
As for the Sosa trade, count me as someone who still thinks the trade was the right move. The Sox couldn't afford a strikeout machine like Sammy in the lineup. HE WAS TERRIBLE! We were a much better team after Sosa was traded, even with George Bell crapping out after one season.

We couldn't win division titles in 1993 and 1994 with Shammy striking out every fourth at-bat. The day Sosa wins a championship for the Flubbies is the day I change my mind about the value of the trade. I'm not too worried about that happening any time soon.

We're trying to win championships on this end of town. Let stupid Flub fans pull their puds about Shammy's zingers. They do that best anyway.

I don't like Sosa. He is a big-headed, selfish, wife-beating, egomaniac. But come on, how can you possible suggest that the trade was a good one for the Sox? We couldn't win division titles in '93 and '94 with sosa in the lineup? In '93, the two guys who took what would have been Sosa's ABs did the following: Bell hit 13 HRs with 64 RBIs in 410 ABs and Bo Jackson hit 16 HRs with 45 RBIs and 106 (!!!!) Ks in 284 ABs (!!!!). Sosa hit 33 HRs with 93 RBIs and 135 Ks in 598 ABs for the Cubs that year. I feel pretty confident that those numbers in place of the Bell/Bo numbers for the Sox would not have lost the division title for the Sox. In '94, Sosa hit 25 HRs with 70 RBIs and 92 Ks in 426 ABs while our RF, Darrin Jackson, hit 10 Hrs, 51 RBIs and 56 Ks in 369 ABs. Again, do you honestly, truly and really think that the Sox would not have finished with the best record in the division if Sosa was playing instead of DJ?

Foulke You
11-27-2002, 04:22 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
I don't like Sosa. He is a big-headed, selfish, wife-beating, egomaniac. But come on, how can you possible suggest that the trade was a good one for the Sox? We couldn't win division titles in '93 and '94 with sosa in the lineup? In '93, the two guys who took what would have been Sosa's ABs did the following: Bell hit 13 HRs with 64 RBIs in 410 ABs and Bo Jackson hit 16 HRs with 45 RBIs and 106 (!!!!) Ks in 284 ABs (!!!!). Sosa hit 33 HRs with 93 RBIs and 135 Ks in 598 ABs for the Cubs that year. I feel pretty confident that those numbers in place of the Bell/Bo numbers for the Sox would not have lost the division title for the Sox. In '94, Sosa hit 25 HRs with 70 RBIs and 92 Ks in 426 ABs while our RF, Darrin Jackson, hit 10 Hrs, 51 RBIs and 56 Ks in 369 ABs. Again, do you honestly, truly and really think that the Sox would not have finished with the best record in the division if Sosa was playing instead of DJ?

Comparing Sosa's NL Cubs numbers for those years is irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. Sosa was on a rebuilding Cubs team in a weak division in the National League. The Sox were in a "win now" mentality (imagine that!) and needed production in high pressure games that actually meant something. Hriniak stayed as our hitting coach for a number of years after the Sosa trade so it is not out of the realm of possibility that had Sosa stayed with the Sox, he would've been released or sent down due to a lack of production. Sammy didn't get along with Sox coaches at all and refused to listen to Walt. He was hitting in the low .200s and was striking out a ton.

In essence, the Sox were trading a Russell Branyon type player who had a little more speed and defense (at the time). The bottom line is it isn't hurting us now, and didn't hurt us then either. Also, there was no way to know that Sammy would start using the Nandro growth hormone in '98. :D:

jeremyb1
11-27-2002, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Allow me to reintroduce you to "Jumbotron" Ron Schueler:

*Traded Sammy Sosa for George Bell

*Traded three players (including a young Bob Wickman) for
Steve Sax

* Traded Jack McDowell for three minor leaguers

Also Jumbo knowing that the Sox desperatly needed pitching help in the 2nd half of the aforementioned 2000 season refused to part with any of his "can't miss kids" even though Eldred was out, Baldwin had a bad shoulder (which caused him to miss a month) and late in the season both Sirotka and Parque got hurt.

Yea he was a GREAT GM , he did EXACTLY as his master Uncle Jerry commanded! (Keep that payroll down!!!)

Lip

as was previously stated, especting schu to somehow bypass reinsdorf and use (steal) reinsdorfs money to create a higher payroll is a pretty ridiculous demand. as for the moves you list none of them are that bad other than the sosa deal which is obviously a pretty glaring mistake.

sax for bob wickman? that's not such a terrible deal. wickman was an above average reliever who had success as a closer for a few years. i just don't see that as a huge mistake. wickman was never an incredible player.

i also don't see how dealing mcdowell was schuler's fault. reinsdorf controls the money and he pissed off mcdowell by forcing him to go to arbitration every year and then wouldn't sign him to a long deal so schu had to trade him before he became a free agent. i fail to see how that's a bad move.

i think your argument about 2000 and pitching help is absurd. supposedly the rockies were asking for garland and wells for pedro astacio. how is that a good deal? the biggest problem here is that you complain that schuler traded potential in sosa to add veterans for the playoffs in the future but then its his fault he didn't do the same in '00. also, with the benefit of hindsight its clear that one starting pitcher would've accomplished nothing for us. we were swept in three games. we were dominated. our entire staff was hurting. there's no way one starter would've turned everything around.

hold2dibber
11-27-2002, 04:30 PM
Originally posted by Foulke You
Comparing Sosa's NL Cubs numbers for those years is irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. Sosa was on a rebuilding Cubs team in a weak division in the National League. The Sox were in a "win now" mentality (imagine that!) and needed production in high pressure games that actually meant something. Hriniak stayed as our hitting coach for a number of years after the Sosa trade so it is not out of the realm of possibility that had Sosa stayed with the Sox, he would've been released or sent down due to a lack of production. Sammy didn't get along with Sox coaches at all and refused to listen to Walt. He was hitting in the low .200s and was striking out a ton.

In essence, the Sox were trading a Russell Branyon type player who had a little more speed and defense (at the time). The bottom line is it isn't hurting us now, and didn't hurt us then either. Also, there was no way to know that Sammy would start using the Nandro growth hormone in '98. :D:

This strikes me as excuse making and fueled by hatred of the Cubs and Sosa (hatred which I share, by the way) not by reason. I agree that at the time it seemed like a good idea; the Branyan comparison is apt. I would have traded Sosa for Bell in a heart beat at that time myself. But Bell didn't provide "production in high pressure games," at least not in '93. He was good in '92, but he absolutely sucked in '93 and he was a true clubhouse cancer by the time the playoffs rolled around, bitching and moaning about playing time. He was a HUGE distraction, IMHO. In any event, I don't recall how much longer Hriniak was the Sox' hitting coach and you MAY be right about how Sosa would have fared under his tutelege (but that is an indictment of Hriniak and the Sox, not of Sosa). But Sosa has put up absolutely monstrous numbers. I agree he is overhyped and that his numbers have been largely meaningless and that his true value is not as great as his numbers would suggest and that his numbers may have been fueled by pills. But George Bell gave the Sox next to nothing. He did not lead the Sox to the playoffs (they made it in '93 despite Bell, not because of him). He did not help the Sox win a title. He did squat for the Sox, whereas Sosa has hit about 450 HRs since leaving the Sox. To suggest that the Sox got the best of that trade, or even that it was even, is not justifiable, period.

Daver
11-27-2002, 04:39 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Allow me to reintroduce you to "Jumbotron" Ron Schueler:

*Traded Sammy Sosa for George Bell

*Traded three players (including a young Bob Wickman) for
Steve Sax

* Traded Jack McDowell for three minor leaguers

Also Jumbo knowing that the Sox desperatly needed pitching help in the 2nd half of the aforementioned 2000 season refused to part with any of his "can't miss kids" even though Eldred was out, Baldwin had a bad shoulder (which caused him to miss a month) and late in the season both Sirotka and Parque got hurt.

Yea he was a GREAT GM , he did EXACTLY as his master Uncle Jerry commanded! (Keep that payroll down!!!)

Lip

You forgot to mention that he also wasted a draft pick by drafting his daughter.

FanOf14
11-27-2002, 04:44 PM
Yes Sosa has hit all those homers with the Cubs, but I really doubt that it would have happened with the Sox. Whether that was because the coaches wouldn't tolerate his ego (and certain other things) or because he needed a change of scenery, who knows, but I seriously doubt he would have developed into a homer machine with the Sox. Sorry, but I still don't see that trade as horrible; I was glad he was gone then and I am still glad he is gone.

PaleHoseGeorge
11-27-2002, 04:53 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
I don't like Sosa. He is a big-headed, selfish, wife-beating, egomaniac. But come on, how can you possible suggest that the trade was a good one for the Sox? We couldn't win division titles in '93 and '94 with sosa in the lineup? In '93, the two guys who took what would have been Sosa's ABs did the following: Bell hit 13 HRs with 64 RBIs in 410 ABs and Bo Jackson hit 16 HRs with 45 RBIs and 106 (!!!!) Ks in 284 ABs (!!!!). Sosa hit 33 HRs with 93 RBIs and 135 Ks in 598 ABs for the Cubs that year. I feel pretty confident that those numbers in place of the Bell/Bo numbers for the Sox would not have lost the division title for the Sox. In '94, Sosa hit 25 HRs with 70 RBIs and 92 Ks in 426 ABs while our RF, Darrin Jackson, hit 10 Hrs, 51 RBIs and 56 Ks in 369 ABs. Again, do you honestly, truly and really think that the Sox would not have finished with the best record in the division if Sosa was playing instead of DJ?

Unlike you, I'm measuring the ACTUAL results.

In 1993 and 1994, Sosa's OPS was .794 and .884, both of them inflated by playing in Small Fry Park. After three seasons with the Sox, his average OPS was .657. That's over 100 points less than he achieved on the loser Cubs while the Sox won two division titles.

So who was our rightfielder in 1993? Ellis Burks, putting up an OPS of .793, virtually identical to Shammy's at Small Fry Park.

And who was our rightfielder in 1994? Darrin Jackson putting up an OPS of .817, 67 points short of Shammy's at Small Fry Park. Do you think that made a difference?

Yes, Sammy went on to even bigger numbers. However, if you're going to assert the Sox would have gotten the same production from Shammy those years, I'm going to assert the Sox would be no better off than the Cubs actually were in the won-loss column. The Sox weren't doing squat in the late-90's... and SURPRISE!... neither were the Cubs! (Apologies to their glorious backing into a one-game wild card playoff).

By 2000, we've got Magglio Ordonez in right field--and the Sox win their third division championship. The Flubs, Shammy, and his zingers? They're still searching for their first one.

So tell me why you think we would have done any better had we kept Sammy.

Soxheads
11-27-2002, 04:57 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Unlike you, I'm measuring the ACTUAL results.

In 1993 and 1994, Sosa's OPS was .794 and .884, both of them inflated by playing in Small Fry Park. After three seasons with the Sox, his average OPS was .657. That's over 100 points less than he achieved on the loser Cubs while the Sox won two division titles.

So who was our rightfielder in 1993? Ellis Burks, putting up an OPS of .793, virtually identical to Shammy's at Small Fry Park.

And who was our rightfielder in 1994? Darrin Jackson putting up an OPS of .817, 67 points short of Shammy's at Small Fry Park. Do you think that made a difference?

Yes, Sammy went on to even bigger numbers. However, if you're going to assert the Sox would have gotten the same production from Shammy those years, I'm going to assert the Sox would be no better off than the Cubs actually were in the won-loss column. The Sox weren't doing squat in the late-90's... and SURPRISE!... neither were the Cubs! (Apologies to their glorious backing into a one-game wild card playoff).

By 2000, we've got Magglio Ordonez in right field--and the Sox win their third division championship. The Flubs, Shammy, and his zingers? They're still searching for their first one.

So tell me why you think we would have done any better had we kept Sammy.

Somebody is trying hard to sell French Fries.... :D:

Lip Man 1
11-27-2002, 07:49 PM
Just FYI:

Sammy Sosa was the only player in MLB in 1990 to have double figures in doubles, triples, home runs, stolen bases and outfield assists.

As fas as Jeremy and his contention that the Sax for Wickman deal wasn't that bad, Sax was a joke in his brief time with the Sox which lasted I think, two and a half seasons at best. Wickman was a consistent relief guy for the past what seven years?

Lip

Lip Man 1
11-27-2002, 09:45 PM
Also those who suggested that it would be impractical for a GM to override the owner are correct, that's an extremely valid point.

It also serves as an indictment of Schueler, Harrelson and Williams because anyone worth his salt, anyone who has an once of pride and self respect would NOT go to work for Jerry Reinsdorf unless they desperately needed a job.

Reinsdorf has owned the Sox for 22 seasons now. NO ONE in baseball can NOT know how he operates, (low payroll, won't sign pitchers to long term deals, won't negotiate with high powered agents like Scott Boras, has a persecution complex towards the media and the fans...) therefore anyone who wants to work for him must by definition be incompetent or incapable of working elsewhere.

Those that show any modicum of ability, resolve, dedication and so forth get out as soon as they can. or are fired! (I'm referring to folks like Larry Himes, Dan Evans, and Dave Dombrowski, even Roland Hemond went to work for the Orioles where he was MLB executive of the year, I think in 1988)

We are left with the incompetent boobs, the lackeys, the yes men, the ass kissers... which is why you'll never see a GM of quality like Pat Gillick, Walt Jocketty, Brian Cashman, Brian Sabean, John Hart or John Shuerholtz even APPLY for a job with the Sox let alone work for them. (and the distinct probability is that Reinsdorf wouldn't want them because of their ability, independance and desire to win...)

Just my opinion...

Lip

baggio202
11-28-2002, 12:31 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Also those who suggested that it would be impractical for a GM to override the owner are correct, that's an extremely valid point.

It also serves as an indictment of Schueler, Harrelson and Williams because anyone worth his salt, anyone who has an once of pride and self respect would NOT go to work for Jerry Reinsdorf unless they desperately needed a job.

Reinsdorf has owned the Sox for 22 seasons now. NO ONE in baseball can NOT know how he operates, (low payroll, won't sign pitchers to long term deals, won't negotiate with high powered agents like Scott Boras, has a persecution complex towards the media and the fans...) therefore anyone who wants to work for him must by definition be incompetent or incapable of working elsewhere.

Those that show any modicum of ability, resolve, dedication and so forth get out as soon as they can. or are fired! (I'm referring to folks like Larry Himes, Dan Evans, and Dave Dombrowski, even Roland Hemond went to work for the Orioles where he was MLB executive of the year, I think in 1988)

We are left with the incompetent boobs, the lackeys, the yes men, the ass kissers... which is why you'll never see a GM of quality like Pat Gillick, Walt Jocketty, Brian Cashman, Brian Sabean, John Hart or John Shuerholtz even APPLY for a job with the Sox let alone work for them. (and the distinct probability is that Reinsdorf wouldn't want them because of their ability, independance and desire to win...)

Just my opinion...

Lip

it might just be your opinion...but its a damn good one..shared by many

PaleHoseGeorge
11-28-2002, 02:47 AM
Originally posted by baggio202
it might just be your opinion...but its a damn good one..shared by many

We chew up a lot of bandwith around here arguing over the details behind what the Sox lack/need to become champions. I would say Lip has hit the bullseye for the true reason behind all other trouble the Sox have.

I mean really, who within the Sox organization would we all agree is truly competent and the VERY BEST at what they do among their major league peers? Only two names jump to mind.

1. Trainer Herm Schnieder. He has worked miracles with rehabbing players' health.

2. Groundskeeper Roger Bossard. Even opposing teams comment on the quality of his work.

I would also add organist Nancy Faust to this list, but clearly the Sox don't think much of her. Gallas keeps cutting her playing time.

So here is to MLB's best trainer, groundskeeper, and organist. Cheers to Herm, Roger, and Nancy!

:gulp:
:gulp:
:gulp:

RedPinStripes
11-28-2002, 09:40 AM
I cant wait to see a thread up here with about 1000 replies that is titled " Jerry Sells!!!! We have a new owner"!!!!!!!

gosox41
11-29-2002, 09:07 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Allow me to reintroduce you to "Jumbotron" Ron Schueler:

*Traded Sammy Sosa for George Bell

*Traded three players (including a young Bob Wickman) for
Steve Sax

* Traded Jack McDowell for three minor leaguers

Also Jumbo knowing that the Sox desperatly needed pitching help in the 2nd half of the aforementioned 2000 season refused to part with any of his "can't miss kids" even though Eldred was out, Baldwin had a bad shoulder (which caused him to miss a month) and late in the season both Sirotka and Parque got hurt.

Yea he was a GREAT GM , he did EXACTLY as his master Uncle Jerry commanded! (Keep that payroll down!!!)

Lip




I have no problem with the Sox not getting pitching help in 2000. They cruised on to the playoffs and the main reason they were swept there was due to lack of hitting.

Bob

PaleHoseGeorge
11-29-2002, 10:23 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
I have no problem with the Sox not getting pitching help in 2000. They cruised on to the playoffs and the main reason they were swept there was due to lack of hitting.


Word up! We fret so much around here about our weak pitching staff, we forget it was our offense that went stone cold in the ALDS and got us swept by wild-card Seattle. If anything, the pitching was great.

Who else remembers Harold Baines being our offensive hero in Game 3? Harold Frickin' Baines! He doubled, tagged up and advanced to third, then scored sliding at home. God Bless, Harold. It was the last good game of his career.

Like lots of pitching staffs, ours was overworked trying to win the championship in 2000. That's okay; you have to take your shots when they present themselves. However, it was soon obvious the pitching staff was hurt and incapable of repeating the feat in 2001. This DOES NOT excuse Sox management for doing nothing to address the issue in 2002, unless you want to give KW credit for trading 3 pitchers to get Todd Ritchie. I wouldn't.

Lip Man 1
11-29-2002, 12:45 PM
With respect to my good friend Pale Hose George, remember the Sox scored FOUR RUNS in Game #1 of the 2000 ALDS.

They blew the lead after Jim Parque was removed (possibly because his arm was hurting and he simply couldn't go any further?)

In most playoff games, when you score four runs, you should win.

Playoffs are usually about top shelf pitchers doing what needs to be done. Obviously the Sox didn't have any. Could that have been rectified?

Well it's a fact that rumors were out that the Sox might have been interested in both Curt Schilling and Mike Mussina. The rumors were strong enough that both pitchers said they didn't want to be traded to the Sox.

Now comes the real question, should Jumbotron Ron have traded for them anyway? I mean what were they going to do, NOT show up and retire? Granted they certainly would not have resigned with the Sox but that gets back to a question on another thread, do you "win" now when you have the chance or do you play the odds in trying to win down the road.

In my opinion, given the history of the Sox and the history of the ownership / organization, they should have rolled the dice regardless of cost, and shored up the pitching staff.

If (always the biggest little word in the world) the Sox win game one (when they scored four runs...) who knows what might have happened?

Just speculating, but that's what I would have done as GM.

I'm sick and tired of waiting for the Sox "can't miss kid" pitchers to suddenly turn into 20 game, Cy Young Award winners. It isn't going to happen.

Lip

PaleHoseGeorge
11-29-2002, 01:33 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
With respect to my good friend Pale Hose George, remember the Sox scored FOUR RUNS in Game #1 of the 2000 ALDS.

They blew the lead after Jim Parque was removed (possibly because his arm was hurting and he simply couldn't go any further?)

In most playoff games, when you score four runs, you should win....



Well if that is your point, why aren't you ripping the Sox bullpen? Isn't that where true blame lies? IIRC, the 2000 Sox had one of the best bullpens in the entire league.

The 2000 Sox also had the most potent lineup in the A.L. It was the hitters that couldn't do jack in the three games that counted, the ALDS. That's what made Baines' Game 3 performance so memorable. He is the only one who seemed to have a clue that day.

jeremyb1
11-29-2002, 03:01 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1

As fas as Jeremy and his contention that the Sax for Wickman deal wasn't that bad, Sax was a joke in his brief time with the Sox which lasted I think, two and a half seasons at best. Wickman was a consistent relief guy for the past what seven years?

Lip

i'm not saying wickman is invaluable, just that as a gm you're bound to make a few mistakes and wickman seems like a pretty minor mistake to me. there are a lot of solid relievers in baseball and they often have modest beginnings so it'd be easy to deal one. schu was on the job for 8 or 9 years, a few small mistakes like that aren't a big deal to me. kw looks like he already traded a number two starter in 2 years on the job, i shudder to think what he'll do if given 8 years.

Lip Man 1
11-29-2002, 10:10 PM
The CEO of WSI says:

Well if that is your point, why aren't you ripping the Sox bullpen? Isn't that where true blame lies?

If the Sox had an "ace" of the caliber of a Schilling, a Mussina, a Clemens, they don't NEED the bullpen in the first place.

Give pitchers of that caliber , four runs in a playoff game, and it's over.

It was a fact that Eldred was gone, that Baldwin missed a month, that Sirotka hurt his arm in the last start of 2000 against the Red Sox (we didn't know until after the fact that Parque was hurting...) So what does Jumbotron Ron do? He traded for an outstanding catcher, whom the Sox never were going to resign because his agent was Scott Boras. If that was the case he could have traded for an outstanding starting pitcher since the Sox weren't going to resign that player either. At least the pitcher might have helped more in the post season.

No question the offense went into a deep slumber however you also have to admit that Alex Rodriguez PERSONALLY made several outstanding defensive plays in crucial situations to save Sox runs. If those balls get through him, perhaps the offense isn't in as deep a funk.

Anyway we're arguing about apples and oranges, it doesn't matter now, the Sox still have lost nine straight home post season games and won't be getting the chance to add to that totals for years.

Lip

Tragg
11-30-2002, 10:09 AM
Originally posted by daver
With as screwed up as the Orioles are this takes the cake,the headline should read "Angelos Gaurantees Four More Years of Idiocy"

Those two bottom feeders deserve each other.

I didn't think Schueler was much of a GM. In the second half of his tenure, he made some decent moves in small deals - the Jim Abott machinations come to mind. Early in his career, his love affair with Cory Snyder was laughable.
I'm in the minority, but I still think he came up woefully short in the white flag deal. The team trading the proven players is SUPPOSED to do better in the long run - that's the deal - players now for more players tomorrow. IN the end, only Foulke and Howry are major leaguers (and Howry is, well, Howry).