PDA

View Full Version : Questions NOT Asked


Lip Man 1
09-04-2003, 11:07 AM
I know this is the last thing you'd expect from me since I am a supporter of the Chicago media and disagree with those who think there is a vast conspiracy against the Sox but I've got to tell you that I was stunned today after reading the Internet editions of the Tribune, Daily Southtown and the Sun Times.

In NONE of the papers under the Sox game recap was any mention made of asking Manager Gandhi WHY he allowed Scott Sullivan (a right hander) to pitch to David Ortiz (a lefty) in a game situation with Damaso Marte warming up in the bullpen.

A friend of mine was at the game last night and e-mailed me this morning asking the same thing. He said he saw Marte warming up and that he kept looking over. Waiting...and waiting...and waiting. He never came in until it was too late.

The game recaps also had no mention of why Manager Gandhi replaced Carl Everett with Willie Harris, for defensive purposes in a TIE GAME.

I'm no expert but even I could see these were two key managerial moves that backfired (naturally) and I can't for the life of me comprehend why those questions weren't asked. I guess I "don't know baseball...." (at least according to Manager Gandhi and Joe Cowley)

If they are mentioned in the hard copy editions of those papers then I'll withdraw my statement but I don't have access to printed editions.

Lip

LASOXFAN
09-04-2003, 11:40 AM
I'm a thousand miles away from the epicenter of this madness, so my take might not be accurate, but I get the sense that the media in many instances gives him a free pass. Maybe it's because there are so many bad decisions. Maybe it's because they feel like the fans have already signed this guy's pink slip so they don't want to be perceived as bowing to fan anger. I'm not sure. But it is simply mind-boggling. I fired up the computer this morning looking for some quote on that non-move to the bullpen and found nothing. That was huge.

But for what it's worth, I support the decision to send Rowand. After all of those blown opportunities earlier, you had to take a chance. If the team was swinging the bats well, then no.

MisterB
09-04-2003, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
The game recaps also had no mention of why Manager Gandhi replaced Carl Everett with Willie Harris, for defensive purposes in a TIE GAME.

Harris was brought in at the top of the 8th, when we were up 3-2. He was the 8th batter due to come up with 1 inning left to play (assuming we had the lead in the 9th). Manuel broke his own pattern of putting Rowand in center late in the game, then Harris in center for the 9th with Rowand moving to left. If he had at least followed his own strange logic, then possibly Harris is pinch running for Thomas, (who could have at least made the play at the plate in the 9th close), and Rowand comes up with Maggs on 3rd, which is obviously better than Harris, but not as good as Everett. The question is who do you want defending centerfield with a one run lead in the 9th? The options aren't exactly great.

FJA
09-04-2003, 01:21 PM
Originally posted by LASOXFAN
I'm a thousand miles away from the epicenter of this madness, so my take might not be accurate, but I get the sense that the media in many instances gives him a free pass. Maybe it's because there are so many bad decisions. Maybe it's because they feel like the fans have already signed this guy's pink slip so they don't want to be perceived as bowing to fan anger. I'm not sure. But it is simply mind-boggling. I fired up the computer this morning looking for some quote on that non-move to the bullpen and found nothing. That was huge.

But for what it's worth, I support the decision to send Rowand. After all of those blown opportunities earlier, you had to take a chance. If the team was swinging the bats well, then no.

I think you hit the nail on the head with your suggestion that the media gives JM a pass because the fans are so hard on him. I really get the feeling that many in the media feel bad for him ... sometimes I do too, because occassionally he does get blamed for things that aren't his fault, and no one says a word when he does something good ... but to not ask the bullpen and Willie Harris questions is inexcusable.

soxtalker
09-04-2003, 03:15 PM
The media do seem to support Manuel. The one time recently that they seemed ready to break with that was when he flip-flopped in NY and did not start Buehrle. It seems that the media just can't understand how fans can be so upset with a first-place manager. It is possible that they simply like the guy. A lot of the players seem to.

Foulke You
09-04-2003, 04:08 PM
There were the obvious questions like your fastest runner Harris not being available to pinch run in the 9th because he replaced Everett thus Everett not batting in possible game winning situation, Sullivan pitching to Ortiz instead of Marte, etc.

The question I ask is why were we pitching to Ortiz in the 10th inning with the bases empty and 1 out? The guy is a Sox killer going back to his days with the Twins and he already hit the go ahead HR. Gordon is a righty and I believe there is a right hander batting after Ortiz. But no, we went right after Ortiz with fastballs and he made us pay. Why put yourself in a situation like that? We did something similar in Texas where we pitched to Palmeiro (Sox killer) in a key situation when Texiera was on deck.

Oh well, at least the bright side is Ortiz doesn't play for the Twins anymore.

Jurr
09-04-2003, 06:09 PM
I think the Harris thing was ludicrous. That was a clear lack of insight as to what may happen later in the game. We didn't have a 5 run lead or even a 2 run lead. However, look at Sullivan's ERA or BA against lefties, and you won't wonder why he was left in there. Screw the righty-lefty thing. Sully can pitch to lefties, so it wasn't stupid to have him in.

LongLiveFisk
09-04-2003, 06:42 PM
Originally posted by Jurr
Screw the righty-lefty thing.

Amen to that. That is very overrated in my opinion unless you are facing an extremely dominating pitcher like Randy Johnson.

And by the way, how many times has Brian Daubach been announced as the pinch-hitter only to have the opposing manager make a pitching change and force him back to the dugout? Granted, he's not having his best year, but I've seen him hit lefties plenty of times when he was with Boston. Jeez, Jerry!!

soxruleEP
09-04-2003, 07:07 PM
Originally posted by LongLiveFisk
Amen to that. That is very overrated in my opinion unless you are facing an extremely dominating pitcher like Randy Johnson.

And by the way, how many times has Brian Daubach been announced as the pinch-hitter only to have the opposing manager make a pitching change and force him back to the dugout? Granted, he's not having his best year, but I've seen him hit lefties plenty of times when he was with Boston. Jeez, Jerry!!

And you can see that it gets to him--he came out of the dugout last night and he knew that he was going right back in.

soxtalker
09-04-2003, 07:20 PM
Originally posted by soxruleEP
And you can see that it gets to him--he came out of the dugout last night and he knew that he was going right back in.

So, why did they sign him? Did something change during the season?

SoxOnTop
09-04-2003, 11:54 PM
Originally posted by LASOXFAN
But for what it's worth, I support the decision to send Rowand. After all of those blown opportunities earlier, you had to take a chance. If the team was swinging the bats well, then no.

I support it as well. Although, I would not have supported him being sent had Everett been the next batter.

The funny thing is that the Twins took the same risk last night and got easily nailed at the plate, but were only saved becuase Molina doesn't know how to tag out a player at the plate. Some dumb freakin' luck if you ask me.

Of course, many (including those on this site) seem to interpret that dumb luck as "heart" while accusing the Sox of having none. What a crock. Standing in 1st after being 8 out at the break qualifies as heart, too, IMHO.

Lip Man 1
09-05-2003, 02:44 AM
Sox On Top: Mind that I'm not totally disagreeing with what you say... the Sox should be commended for coming from eight back, but the simple fact remains that they were eight games back to start with, says something as well doesn't it?

and the fact that they are in the easiest division in baseball also says something about the ability to get back into the race from eight games out as well.

I think fans everywhere would be more impressed if they were in say, the A.L. West and pulled it off...

Lip

SoxOnTop
09-05-2003, 08:45 AM
Yes, I would be much more impressed as well.

But my point is that the Twins were also a bunch of dogs for the first half of the season and yet they are said to have heart, while the Sox get dogged. Why? They were supposed to have a dominant pitching staff. They had the great defense. The Sox had a lot more questions coming into the season while the Twins had nearly their whole team back. And yet where were they in the first half? What is their excuse?


I just don't get the double standard.

soxtalker
09-05-2003, 09:50 AM
Originally posted by SoxOnTop
I support it as well. Although, I would not have supported him being sent had Everett been the next batter.

The funny thing is that the Twins took the same risk last night and got easily nailed at the plate, but were only saved becuase Molina doesn't know how to tag out a player at the plate. Some dumb freakin' luck if you ask me.


Your comparison with the Twins game is a valid comparison (and one that had dawned on me earlier). But rather than giving outright credibility to sending him, it invites a few comparisions.

First, if the Red Sox had made a mistake and Rowand had scored, we'd all be pretty happy. But would we have questioned the decision. I'd like to think that we would, but I suspect that any complaints would have been muted.

Second, if the Twins gamble had failed earlier in the day and they had lost, would we be as incensed about sending Rowand. I think most of us (who are currently unhappy about the decison) would have.

Third, I'm not sure that the play of the MN Twins is a standard that I'd want to use for comparison. Instead I think that I'd prefer to ask whether the Red Sox, NYY, Atlanta Braves, SF Giants, or Oakland A's would attempt such a play.

dougs78
09-05-2003, 10:46 AM
I think all these things get blown way out of proportion. I think the reason that no member of the media jumps on Manuel for the 53 minor decision he makes every game is because they aren't that big of a deal. You guys overanalyze these small details as if they were major decisions. The fact of the matter is that you win some and you lose some.

Its certainly your prerogative as a fan to be a "monday morning quarterback," but sometimes there seems to be the attitude that being a manager of a MLB team is easy and that by failing to make the minor decisions you thought made sense that Manuel is incompetent.

Things don't always go your way, its just that simple. There are decisions made by every manager that don't work out exactly as planned. You can compare Manuel to anyone else. The reason no one catches on is that they don't question every single small thing that he does. They tend to have a more global focus. And I for one am very happy about that.

Lip Man 1
09-05-2003, 02:11 PM
Sox On Top...look at the injury list for the Twins this season and you'll have your answer. Thev have had massive amounts of injuries (like the Royals) and are still in the hunt. That's "heart."

The Sox had massive amounts of injuries in 2001 and tanked for the first half of the season before coming back (to their credit) to finish a whopping four games over .500.

That's the difference. Oh by the way, the Twins had injury issiues with practically all their starters last year and still won the division going away.

Lip

dougs78
09-05-2003, 04:35 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Oh by the way, the Twins had injury issiues with practically all their starters last year and still won the division going away.

Lip


You may also check and notice that they guys who replaced all those injured "starters" put up better numbers than the supposed "starters" career averages. Not to mention the career years they got from nearly the entire bullpen. Some teams have overcome injuries, the Twins last year did not, they actually were better off with those guys injured.