PDA

View Full Version : If we look at the whole situation.......


Jurr
08-30-2003, 12:10 PM
You would have seen that Buehrle clearly didn't have it last night, which means he probably would have been shelled against New York. Cotts would have played Detroit and lost too. So, either way, we have a slight TWO GAME LOSING STREAK (big f'n deal)!!!!!!
Rowand's going to get to play for Maggs, and if he does well, it's because he's been getting some playing time throughout the season (TINKER TINKER TINKER). Magglio will be back soon.
The point is, Jerry's decision didn't matter that damn much. There are times that your pitchers don't have it, and you're going to lose. Period

LASOXFAN
08-30-2003, 12:19 PM
Let's hope Rowand embraces this chance. He had the chance to tie it up last night with a single and struck out, I believe. That's a drag. In fact, I think he left 4 runners in scoring position. As bad as last night seemed, we had our chances. A double here, a duck snort there and we might have been right back in it. Even in the 9th. The Sox of the first half would have been flatlining on the table after the 3rd or 4th inning. Contrary to Joe Randa's take on this team (which seems to be shared by many of its fans), I think they do have heart. I think that Frank Thomas wants to win more than he ever has, and that means a lot.

voodoochile
08-30-2003, 12:35 PM
Originally posted by Jurr
You would have seen that Buehrle clearly didn't have it last night, which means he probably would have been shelled against New York. Cotts would have played Detroit and lost too. So, either way, we have a slight TWO GAME LOSING STREAK (big f'n deal)!!!!!!
Rowand's going to get to play for Maggs, and if he does well, it's because he's been getting some playing time throughout the season (TINKER TINKER TINKER). Magglio will be back soon.
The point is, Jerry's decision didn't matter that damn much. There are times that your pitchers don't have it, and you're going to lose. Period

Jerry is that you?

Give me a break, Miss Cleo. You have no idea how things might have been different with Buehrle pitching on Thursday and Cotts on Friday. You can speculate all you want that it wouldn't have mattered and in the end it means nothing. Yeah, me speculating that things would have been different with a "real" manager making "practical" decisions, but in the end, the proof is in the pudding. Manuel cost his team the best chance to win both games in an effort to guarantee one win. In the end they lost both games.

You can say Manuel's decision had nothing to do with those losses all you want to, but you are in the small but vocal minority. Doesn't mean you are wrong, just that there aren't many people who think you (and Jerry) were right.

Jerry Manuel is an idiot who has no business managing a baseball team. It has been proven time and time again. Hopefully Rowand performs in his limited time as a starter, but if he does perform, is it a valid reason for tinkering? No, because giving your bench players regular playing time on the theory that there might be an injury to a star down the road is playing not to lose. That is the exact philosophy that led to the Cotts and Buehrle switch in the first place. It was wrong then and it is wrong now.

Maybe the Sox should play to win for a while and see where that gets the team...

SouthBendSox
08-30-2003, 12:41 PM
wow

Lip Man 1
08-30-2003, 12:41 PM
For what it's worth...

If Gandhi's decision didn't make that much difference why did the Chicago beat writers report and imply, how upset many of the players were with the call?

You don't think that impacted the performance Friday?

Also for what it's worth and I'm trying to compose this correctly. I am an acquaintance with Ken Rosenthal of The Sporting News. We discussed this whole affair yesterday and Ken was of the opinion that he didn't think it was a big deal...at first.

About an hour later he contacted me and said that he just got off the phone with a scout that he knows who called what Manuel did "the stupidest managerial decision by far" this baseball season.

Ken is now trying to work this incident into his story that'll be coming out next week on three teams who refused to quit on the season...the Sox, Royals and Expos.

Lip

TraderTim
08-30-2003, 02:04 PM
Lip:

It's Labor Day weekend. We're tied for first in the division. You are as sour now as you were when we were 8 games back. Do you EVER enjoy even one second of the experience that is called the White Sox in a winning season?

I'm not one of the 14 year olds calling you out. Do you ever feel good after a win? Do you ever put your Sox hat on and smile as you go out the door?

Or do you sit behind your computer and practice writing these tirades of nagativism no matter how good the team plays? Does it kill you when they win six of seven because you have to take time away from spouting this crap?

Oooh friend of Ken Rosenthal...Now he calls you back! Big deal...want me to tell you whose office was across from mine at the University of Chicago for three years? Who cares???

Do you ever experience any joy from the White Sox? Or do you only get it posting this constant barrage of negativism here?

Show some class at least once and a while and support the team you supposedly like...

Forkit!

pudge
08-30-2003, 02:25 PM
Originally posted by TraderTim
Lip:

It's Labor Day weekend. We're tied for first in the division. You are as sour now as you were when we were 8 games back. Do you EVER enjoy even one second of the experience that is called the White Sox in a winning season?



Can't we all just understand the differing personalities of our WSI members and enjoy the diversity? We all know to turn to Lip for the negative spin, Jurr for the positive spin, and Viva for the talk radio spin. And the rest of us just bounce in between, some leaning more toward "Fire Jerry" and the others leaning more toward "I'm Happy We're Not in Last Place".

If you don't like Lip's posts, don't read them. He's not going to change, so do you really think your words are going to change him??

I don't understand the people who get mad at the board. We're all hear to express opinions, and we're not all going to agree. Why get upset about it?

I understand some people get annoyed by all the negativity, but some of us get equally annoyed by all the positivity over a team that has yet to really play to its potential. I still don't really feel that jazzed about this team, and I don't think I will until I see them pull about 4-5 games into first place.

Finally, I want to chime in on the initial point of this thread: I agree that JM's decision really was a wash, because we lost both games. You could argue that MB might have been more focused and motivated to pitch in Yankee stadium, but there's no way to know. The only bad thing about this is that it once again alienated JM from his players, who were baffled by the decision, and it also shatters whatever confidence Cotts might have had. But in the end, we lost them both, so we just need to turn it around fast.

Paulwny
08-30-2003, 07:58 PM
Originally posted by pudge
Can't we all just understand the differing personalities of our WSI members and enjoy the diversity? We all know to turn to Lip for the negative spin, Jurr for the positive spin, and Viva for the talk radio spin. And the rest of us just bounce in between, some leaning more toward "Fire Jerry" and the others leaning more toward "I'm Happy We're Not in Last Place".

If you don't like Lip's posts, don't read them. He's not going to change, so do you really think your words are going to change him??

I don't understand the people who get mad at the board. We're all hear to express opinions, and we're not all going to agree. Why get upset about it?

I understand some people get annoyed by all the negativity, but some of us get equally annoyed by all the positivity over a team that has yet to really play to its potential. I still don't really feel that jazzed about this team, and I don't think I will until I see them pull about 4-5 games into first place.




AMEN BROTHER !!!! Great post !!!!

Lip Man 1
08-30-2003, 08:37 PM
Tim:

Once again you misunderstand. I don't drop names to prove anything. I'm trying to supply information... period.

This board has been filled with pro and con comments about Manager Gandhi's decision... this was an opportunity to provide some additional information from a scout who supposedly knows baseball.

I assume in some minds here this is worth something since he makes his living in the sport as opposed to us "no nothing fans."

That's all.

To answer your question about enjoying anything, I do at the end of the season assuming the Sox have a winning record. That's my minimum 'bottom line." (and right now they still haven't hit the 82 win mark have they?)

But overall I won't be satisfied until the Sox get to a World Series they don't even have to win it, just get there.

So if that's not good enough for you, I suggest you follow Pudge's sound advice. But I'd also go a step beyond that and say don't bother reading any of the historical columns either, that I bust my ass on. (The one coming up is a doozy that took two weeks of working on in the evenings.)

You can't have it both ways either take the good with the bad or read nothing at all.

Just my opinion, and thanks for playing!

Lip

OEO Magglio
08-30-2003, 08:50 PM
Voodoo your exactly right nobody knows what would have happened if Buehrle pitched against the yankees, and nobody knows what cotts would have done against the tigers, they both pitched pitched poorly their given nights, but if you flipped them around who knows maybe they both would have been great it's impossible to say whether they would have pitched the same type of ballgames or not.

TraderTim
08-30-2003, 09:14 PM
Lip:

If it's written about the Sox, I'll read it. That's the way I am. I've been an avid Sox fan since five...and that was a long time ago.

I didn't say didn't know what you wrote about. I didn't say your pieces were bad [or good]. This was purely a question about whether you enjoyed the run during the year at all, because even when we beat the living crap out of the Yankees in games one and two, for instance...nothing from you. When we went 6 and 1 on the recent home stretch...nothing from you.

I just wondered what it took for you to post...nice game, Frank. Or...Nice outing, Esteban...Or, Gee, that Sullivan pickup is working great etc.

As I said in the original post...I'm not a 14 year old busting you... I just wanted to know if you ever smile after a game...or get happy after a nice series.

Pudge: This wasn't about me dis-liking Lip or his posts. I didn't attack him personally [if he took it that way, I didn't mean it that way]. This is a guy that spends a tremendous amount of time and energy thinking and writing about the Sox. I know he's a fan. I just want to know --From Him-- If he enjoys the games day-to-day or if he can only see the negative side, because of the way the organization rubs him, for example.

Forkit!

Lip Man 1
08-30-2003, 09:44 PM
Tim:

No offense taken. When you've seen what the Sox have done in the 43 years (I can't believe it's been that long!) that I have passionately followed them you tend to get very jaded.

And again please don't misunderstand my motives. I don't drop names for an ego thrill basically I do it because this is a very discerning board.

Many posters have been roasted and toasted for claiming "I heard from a good source..." and especially when it doesn't come true they get ripped apart and their credibility suffers in the future.

Unless a person specifically forbids me not to use their name (and that usually happens with some folks that I know who work for the Sox) I give the source. That way if it doesn't come true the other fans on this board can't say I made things up.

Lip

TheRockinMT
08-30-2003, 10:51 PM
I am very happy we are in first place on August 30. However, I think the questioning of starting Neal Cotts over Mark Buerhle at yankee stadium is a valid criticism. Sometimes a pitcher of the ilk of Mark Buerhle only suffers from the extra day of rest. You can be too rested and too strong when on the mound and leave your pitches up or overthrow because you feel real strong from the rest. Plus throwing a rookie with only AA experience at the Bronx Zoo just wasn't good.

TornLabrum
08-30-2003, 11:38 PM
Originally posted by OEO Magglio
Voodoo your exactly right nobody knows what would have happened if Buehrle pitched against the yankees, and nobody knows what cotts would have done against the tigers, they both pitched pitched poorly their given nights, but if you flipped them around who knows maybe they both would have been great it's impossible to say whether they would have pitched the same type of ballgames or not.

With all of the posts I've been reading, plus writing a new Fallen Arches column on the same subject, I can't tell you whether I read it or if the idea popped into my head or what, so if this was already mentioned by someone, thanks for the thought.

Starting pitchers work according to a routine, which I would assume would be different when working on five days rest rather than working on four days rest. Now it was Tuesday, I think that Gen. Disarray said that he was 99.9% certain that Buehrle would pitch Thursday night against the Yankees. I would think that this would put Buehrle on a 4-day rest schedule in preparation for his next start.

Then, the night before he is scheduled to start, Buehrle is told that he will sit out a game, thereby disrupting his routine. This cannot be good for the mental aspect of his game, not to mention the fact that, from the way it sounds, he practically begged the general to let him pitch in Yankee Stadium.

So what was the result? On Thursday, a rookie making his fourth major league start was thrown to the wolves in Yankee Stadium. God only knows how that will affect his future development. Harrelson said that he made it a point to tell him he had a great future after the game. In doing so he brought up Scott Ruffcorn's imfamous start against Cleveland. And we all remember what happened to Ruffcorn's career after that psychological blow.

Then on Friday, Buehrle, who is probably already POed and who has had his routine disrupted is sent out against the Tigers. Judging from his attitude on the hill, he thought he was being squeezed by the plate umpire, but who knows how much of that frustration was directed at his manager.

Slice it any way you want, folks, but the job of a manager is to put his players in the best situation for winning. By tinkering with the rotation, Gen. Disarray did just the opposite.

It was also interesting to note Jon Garland's reaction in being pulled tonight. Either he was very POed at himself, or he was angry with the manager.

One final comment. Gen. Disarray has talked about how Cotts would have started the series in Detroit Friday night, and how he was just going with the rotation. Both of those statements are flat-out lies.

First of all, the rotation has been that the front four pitch on four days rest with the fifth starter being used only when necessary. So next he says on the pre-game interview show, "A young pitcher like Neal needs to be kept on a four-day rotation to keep some cinsistency." That's funny because lots of managers this time of year try to limit playing time of young pitchers because they will be pitching more innings than they are used to in the minor leagues.

The rotation for Thursday through Monday, had Manuel followed his own established pattern would have been Buehrle, Garland, Cotts, Loaiza. We saw how Garland handled Detroit today. He did just fine, possibly in part because he had an extra couple of days more than Buehrle to get into his routine for an extra day off.

Manuel's final justification seems to be that he gave Buehrle an extra day of rest while keeping the number of starts the same. He could have done the same next week when there are two off days. The only conclusion I can reach, is that Manuel never looks ahead at the schedule for off days before resting his players.

:jerry

"The only thing I know in the schdule is where we play today."

TornLabrum
08-30-2003, 11:45 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Tim:

No offense taken. When you've seen what the Sox have done in the 43 years (I can't believe it's been that long!) that I have passionately followed them you tend to get very jaded.

The only good thing about having the extra five years experience on you that I have is that I remember the '59 World Series. Otherwise it has just been four extra years of frustration.

If I may be permitted to make an observation, in general the biggest cynics about the Sox seem to be those of us who are in the OF category. The optimists are generally the under-30 crowd who haven't had to experience the entire 44 years it has been since we appeared in a World Series.

When I think about the fact that I was in fourth grade when we clinched the AL pennant against Cleveland, complete school throuh a master's degree, been married for 28 years, raised a son who is now 24 and moved out of the house, and had a 30-year teaching career, it's hard to be optimistic.

OEO Magglio
08-31-2003, 12:12 AM
Tornlabrum I agree with you, getting moved back, and not even knowing what's going on, has to distrupt your mental approach, and getting the extra days rest could mess him up a little bit physically too, considering the 5th starter has been skipped for buehrle or whoever every time this season no matter what the situation was, then Jerry decides for some idiotic reason not to do it this time, there has got to be lingering affects from that.

pudge
08-31-2003, 07:33 PM
Originally posted by TraderTim


Pudge: This wasn't about me dis-liking Lip or his posts. I didn't attack him personally [if he took it that way, I didn't mean it that way]. This is a guy that spends a tremendous amount of time and energy thinking and writing about the Sox. I know he's a fan. I just want to know --From Him-- If he enjoys the games day-to-day or if he can only see the negative side, because of the way the organization rubs him, for example.

Forkit!

Cool, I understood where you were coming from, I was kind of making a blanket statement for everyone since it seemed to get a little heated in here the last week.

It's all good now, we're 1.5 up on both teams, let's keep it rolling!

Tragg
08-31-2003, 08:40 PM
No one knows whether things would have turned out differently; but what we do know is that manuel shows lack of leadership (although, to be fair, we don't know the extent to which kenny williams is interfering and telling him what to do). First the nonsense that manuel spews about "winning a series" is just that - nonsense; this isn't tennis, where things are decided in sets - each game is equally important. Going 3-0 and then 1-2 is the same as winning two series, 2-1.
Second, it was MB's turn in the rotation - when in doubt, go with the status quo. Third, MB is the vet, wanted to pitch in yankee - give the vet the nod. Fourth, to throw a rookie into yankee stadium, the most storied venue in all of sports, is a tough deal and is likely to drum up the butterflies - when you can avoid that, perhaps you should? Finally, the waffling just shows a lack of confidence, a lack of direction.
Hindsight - perhaps; but looking at the facts as they stood then, it was just poor leadership.

TraderTim
08-31-2003, 09:22 PM
Lip:

Ya got me by three years...

My father quit on the Sox when they broke up the 1959 World Series team...But I had five older brothers that were die-hard Sox fans by then and they kept me going in the right direction.

It took me 40 years to get my father back to a Sox game...after they broke up the '59 team, he became a spiteful Cub fan. He'd watch the Cub games and bitch and moan about how awful they were. I think that led me to be a more enthusiastic Sox fan.

One of the highlights of my life was taking my father to the Sox-Cubs game in 1999...He had a ball and he rooted for the Sox again. He didn't make it to the 2000 season, but at least he died back in the fold, a Sox fan.

Forkit!