PDA

View Full Version : The Jerry Manuel Years: 1998-2003


RKMeibalane
09-20-2003, 05:16 PM
The following are my top ten Jerry Manuel moments during his time as the Chicago White Sox manager:

10. Informing the media that Royce Clayton was "benched indefinitely," only to give him a start two days later.

9. Giving mediocre players playing time because of personal reasons (i.e. Aaron Rowand went to school here).

8. Accusing Frank Thomas of quitting the team near the end of the '99 season, only to later find out that Thomas had suffered a serious injury, which would have prevented most people from even walking, let alone playing baseball.

7. Claiming that Sox fans "don't understand baseball" because they were critical of his decision to start Neal Cotts over Mark Buehrle at Yankee Stadium.

6. Allowed a dispute between Paul Konerko and Frank Thomas to escalate, giving the media yet another opportunity to make the Sox look bad.

5. Being completely out-managed by Lou Pinella during the 2000 ALDS. The Sox haven't been the same since this disaster.

4. Refusing to play Frank Thomas at first base, even though it had been proven (over and over and over) that Frank was more productive when playing the field.

3. Refusing to disclipline players for serious mental mistakes, even when they cost the Sox games.

2. Effectively destroying the Sox 2003 Pennant hopes by allowing Jose Paniaqua to pitch during a game when an arch rival.

1. Admitting on numerous occasions that he "likes to tinker, even though it usually doesn't work."

JRIG
09-20-2003, 05:54 PM
Originally posted by RKMeibalane
The following are my top ten Jerry Manuel moments during his time as the Chicago White Sox manager:

10. Informing the media that Royce Clayton was "benched indefinitely," only to give him a start two days later.

9. Giving mediocre players playing time because of personal reasons (i.e. Aaron Rowand went to school here).

8. Accusing Frank Thomas of quitting the team near the end of the '99 season, only to later find out that Thomas had suffered a serious injury, which would have prevented most people from even walking, let alone playing baseball.

7. Claiming that Sox fans "don't understand baseball" because they were critical of his decision to start Neal Cotts over Mark Buehrle at Yankee Stadium.

6. Allowed a dispute between Paul Konerko and Frank Thomas to escalate, giving the media yet another opportunity to make the Sox look bad.

5. Being completely out-managed by Lou Pinella during the 2000 ALDS. The Sox haven't been the same since this disaster.

4. Refusing to play Frank Thomas at first base, even though it had been proven (over and over and over) that Frank was more productive when playing the field.

3. Refusing to disclipline players for serious mental mistakes, even when they cost the Sox games.

2. Effectively destroying the Sox 2003 Pennant hopes by allowing Jose Paniaqua to pitch during a game when an arch rival.

1. Admitting on numerous occasions that he "likes to tinker, even though it usually doesn't work."


What about:

Telling the media he was 99.9% sure Mark Buehrle would start againts the Yanks, then starting Neil Cotts.

Taking Keith Foulke out of the closer's role last season and refusing to give him another chance, even though he was lights out for 5 out of 6 months of the season

Playing Julio Ramirez constantly at the start of the 2001 season, even though he was batting .091 and refusing to stop playing him until Kenny Williams finally sent him to AAA.

JRIG
09-20-2003, 06:08 PM
And, in conjunction with KW:

Leaving Mark Johnson off the playoff roster in 2000 and keeping Josh Paul

The general handling of Sean Lowe during his time with the Sox

soxtalker
09-20-2003, 07:01 PM
I can't say that I agree with all of these (e.g., #9 on RK's list), but one theme does seem to come through on a lot of these. There are a number of decisions that JM makes that it is hard to understand his reasoning. We have a number of disagreements on this board. (Again, I'll cite Aaron Rowand's value as an example.) Usually there is a debate back and forth, and you can at least see the other person's rationale even though you might not agree with it. For a number of JM's decisions, though, it almost seems like he's making the call based purely on whim or gut instinct -- even if it flies in the face of reason.

jeremyb1
09-20-2003, 07:03 PM
Originally posted by RKMeibalane
9. Giving mediocre players playing time because of personal reasons (i.e. Aaron Rowand went to school here).

You know, it doesn't really matter at this point but I hope some of you can realize the extent to which people go out of there was to create problems with Manuel that do not truly exist. The bias is amazing. Many of the things Manuel is crucified for he never actually even did. I don't see why people get so upset when Frank's comments are taken out of context but no one cares when people fabricate actions by Manuel and then complain about them.

The prime example here is the complaint above. Manuel did something smart, he started a platoon between Everett and Rowand in centerfield since Rowand hits lefties better than Everett and plays superior defense. We went to Anaheim and faced a lefty meaning Rowand was in the lineup. Teddy Greenstein wrote in his notes "Rowand, who attended school at nearby Cal State Fullerton will start tommorow". He did not write or imply that Rowand was starting because he went to school nearby, he wrote it as an additional fact about Aaron Rowand some might find interesting.

As far as I'm concerned there was never any reason to believe that Manuel started Rowand because he went to school nearby. I really don't think anyone can point to any piece of evidence anywhere that suggests that. In my opinion its undeniable that what is a widely accepted fact in these parts - that Rowand started because he went to school nearby - is completely and utterly false. I'm not saying Manuel is a good manager but can anyone look at something like this and try to tell me he's been treated completely fairly? I don't see how you could and it should make you wonder about how many other issues he's been unfairly critisized for.

voodoochile
09-20-2003, 07:19 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
You know, it doesn't really matter at this point but I hope some of you can realize the extent to which people go out of there was to create problems with Manuel that do not truly exist. The bias is amazing. Many of the things Manuel is crucified for he never actually even did. I don't see why people get so upset when Frank's comments are taken out of context but no one cares when people fabricate actions by Manuel and then complain about them.

The prime example here is the complaint above. Manuel did something smart, he started a platoon between Everett and Rowand in centerfield since Rowand hits lefties better than Everett and plays superior defense. We went to Anaheim and faced a lefty meaning Rowand was in the lineup. Teddy Greenstein wrote in his notes "Rowand, who attended school at nearby Cal State Fullerton will start tommorow". He did not write or imply that Rowand was starting because he went to school nearby, he wrote it as an additional fact about Aaron Rowand some might find interesting.

As far as I'm concerned there was never any reason to believe that Manuel started Rowand because he went to school nearby. I really don't think anyone can point to any piece of evidence anywhere that suggests that. In my opinion its undeniable that what is a widely accepted fact in these parts - that Rowand started because he went to school nearby - is completely and utterly false. I'm not saying Manuel is a good manager but can anyone look at something like this and try to tell me he's been treated completely fairly? I don't see how you could and it should make you wonder about how many other issues he's been unfairly critisized for.

Okay, so let's take this to an extreme. You are 100% correct that the above example is unfair. No problem I admit it. You win.

What about the other 9 points? :D:

DonkeyKongerko
09-20-2003, 07:40 PM
Gary Glover getting a week off once in a while should be in there too.

duke of dorwood
09-20-2003, 09:18 PM
Dont forget losing Von Joshua and kepping Nardi Contreras around

Viva Magglio
09-20-2003, 09:24 PM
Great list, great list! But you forgot to mention Manuel influencing the Bears to hire Dick Jaruon who, in turn, hired John Shoop.

voodoochile
09-20-2003, 09:48 PM
Originally posted by duke of dorwood
Dont forget losing Von Joshua and kepping Nardi Contreras around

Ah yes, the Nardi era. I remember it fondly...

Jerko
09-20-2003, 10:28 PM
How about taking Buehrle out with a 4-1 lead on the Yankees last year because "it's hard to get good hitters out 4 times in a row" and then letting Colon face Bonds on HIS 4th at bat? I think we lost both of those games too.

voodoochile
09-20-2003, 10:33 PM
Originally posted by Jerko
How about taking Buehrle out with a 4-1 lead on the Yankees last year because "it's hard to get good hitters out 4 times in a row" and then letting Colon face Bonds on HIS 4th at bat? I think we lost both of those games too.

That was my birthday...

Jerko
09-20-2003, 10:34 PM
Sorry about that.

voodoochile
09-20-2003, 10:36 PM
Originally posted by Jerko
Sorry about that.

Not your fault, but thanks... :D: I think the root of the problem will be gone soon enough and nothing is going to save this season either way.

Grobber33
09-20-2003, 11:22 PM
You could likely construct an even larger Terry Bevington list.
Example: Went to the mound,second trip in an inning,and called for a new Pitcher with none warming up. Foulke had to come in and walk 2 intentionaly just to warm up.

RKMeibalane
09-20-2003, 11:37 PM
Originally posted by Grobber33
You could likely construct an even larger Terry Bevington list.
Example: Went to the mound,second trip in an inning,and called for a new Pitcher with none warming up. Foulke had to come in and walk 2 intentionaly just to warm up.

That was awful. It's amazing how the White Sox have been forced to endure some of the worst managerial regimes in baseball history. Even when they have won, their managers haven't been good enough to get them where they want to be.

Even if the strike hadn't ended the 1994 season, I don't think Gene Lamont was the man to guide the Sox to the World Series.

TommyJohn
09-20-2003, 11:56 PM
Originally posted by Grobber33
You could likely construct an even larger Terry Bevington list.
Example: Went to the mound,second trip in an inning,and called for a new Pitcher with none warming up. Foulke had to come in and walk 2 intentionaly just to warm up.

Ah. Grobber has invoked the name of Terry Bevington, one of
my least favorite White Sox of all time. What a complete and
utter jackass. How about:

Throwing punches with Phil Garner ON THE FIELD during a game
with the Brewers.

Fighting with an umpire (Richie Garcia?) on the field, then CON-
TINUING the fight at Gibson's Steakhouse later that night. Then
he had the nerve to say that Garcia continued the fight. Never
mind that Garcia had not had an incident like that in the past.
Has any umpire for that matter? Given Bev's style and overall
IQ, I've no doubt that he continued it, not the ump.

In conclusion, may I say:

Terry Bevington, you are a complete, utter, 100% government
inspected and approved


MORON :angry: :angry: :angry:

RKMeibalane
09-20-2003, 11:59 PM
What is Terry Bevington doing now? Is he still in baseball? With our luck, JR will bring him back to the South Side.

At least Frank will back at first base next season.

TornLabrum
09-21-2003, 01:00 AM
Originally posted by TommyJohn
Ah. Grobber has invoked the name of Terry Bevington, one of
my least favorite White Sox of all time. What a complete and
utter jackass. How about:

Throwing punches with Phil Garner ON THE FIELD during a game
with the Brewers.

Fighting with an umpire (Richie Garcia?) on the field, then CON-
TINUING the fight at Gibson's Steakhouse later that night. Then
he had the nerve to say that Garcia continued the fight. Never
mind that Garcia had not had an incident like that in the past.
Has any umpire for that matter? Given Bev's style and overall
IQ, I've no doubt that he continued it, not the ump.

In conclusion, may I say:

Terry Bevington, you are a complete, utter, 100% government
inspected and approved


moron

How about the call where he kept screaming at the ump that the ball was fair when he meant to say it was foul? (Or was it the other way around?) At any rate, it's the first time I remember anything in a real ball game that resembled the cartoon "Baseball Bugs."

1951Campbell
09-21-2003, 01:45 AM
Originally posted by TommyJohn
Ah. Grobber has invoked the name of Terry Bevington, one of
my least favorite White Sox of all time. What a complete and
utter jackass. How about:

Throwing punches with Phil Garner ON THE FIELD during a game
with the Brewers.

Fighting with an umpire (Richie Garcia?) on the field, then CON-
TINUING the fight at Gibson's Steakhouse later that night. Then
he had the nerve to say that Garcia continued the fight. Never
mind that Garcia had not had an incident like that in the past.
Has any umpire for that matter? Given Bev's style and overall
IQ, I've no doubt that he continued it, not the ump.

In conclusion, may I say:

Terry Bevington, you are a complete, utter, 100% government
inspected and approved


moron

That's all well and good, but who can really object to Phil Garner getting punched?

kittle42
09-21-2003, 01:27 PM
Originally posted by Grobber33
You could likely construct an even larger Terry Bevington list.
Example: Went to the mound,second trip in an inning,and called for a new Pitcher with none warming up. Foulke had to come in and walk 2 intentionaly just to warm up.

That was, hands down, the worst managing move I have ever seen.

voodoochile
09-21-2003, 02:09 PM
Originally posted by kittle42
That was, hands down, the worst managing move I have ever seen.

How about going to a 4-man rotation after the season is already decided?

I mean what can be accomplished by doing it - permanent injury?

wassagstdu
09-21-2003, 02:25 PM
I hope this is the end of the Frank Thomas era too. I have had my fill of Home Run Derby ("It's a home run or nothing here on Home Run Derby..."). I like JM but any manager who either encourages or does not stop his hitters (ALL of them) from swinging from the heels at every pitch regardless of situation needs to be replaced. This whole season has been destroyed by a bunch of hitters looking out for their own numbers and not the team's W/L -- so they won't be blamed for the final result. Just like I am sure a whole bunch of people are shouting "It isn't Frank's fault!!"

longshot7
09-21-2003, 03:54 PM
Originally posted by JRIG
And, in conjunction with KW:

Leaving Mark Johnson off the playoff roster in 2000 and keeping Josh Paul

in Kenny's defense, that was Schueler's doing.

JRIG
09-21-2003, 04:38 PM
Originally posted by longshot7
in Kenny's defense, that was Schueler's doing.

Whoops. Good catch. Apologies to KW on that one.

hold2dibber
09-22-2003, 09:47 AM
Originally posted by RKMeibalane
2. Effectively destroying the Sox 2003 Pennant hopes by allowing Jose Paniaqua to pitch during a game when an arch rival.


I agree with most of your list, and I thikk JM is a horrible manager. But I've heard this complaint from several Sox fans and I find it to be absolutely ridiculous. The Twins have one big inning against Paniaqua and that's what ruined the season? C'mon. Right after that, the Sox went to Boston and won 2 of 3. So they somehow got over the Paniaqua affair but then it once again infected them several days later? No way. That one inning had nothing to do with this team's demise.

Jerko
09-22-2003, 09:57 AM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
I agree with most of your list, and I thikk JM is a horrible manager. But I've heard this complaint from several Sox fans and I find it to be absolutely ridiculous. The Twins have one big inning against Paniaqua and that's what ruined the season? C'mon. Right after that, the Sox went to Boston and won 2 of 3. So they somehow got over the Paniaqua affair but then it once again infected them several days later? No way. That one inning had nothing to do with this team's demise.


DIBBER, I think people are misunderstanding the Paniagua argument. THAT did not as much ruin the Sox season as it did IGNITE the Twins season. (even though igniting that team DID ruin the Sox season) My exact words that night were "Why give them any hope, you know how they are". That's what I'm pissed about. Had them down 1 game to 0, 8-2 in game 2 and then gave them a spark, some confidence. That was not unlike the Detroit game that the Sox lost 10-9 but came on strong at the end. That game gave the Sox a spark, why can't the same thing happen to the Twins? Also, ESPN themselves last night showed the records of both the Sox and Twins since Septemeber 9.

TWINS 11-1
SOX 3-8

September 9 was game 2 of the Minnesota series that Paniagua pitched in. So, since that game, the Twins are almost unbeatable and the Sox are clueless. I think that game had more of an effect than you think. I readily admit that a pro team should NOT let that happen, but we all know how powerful the collective psyche of the White Sox has been over the years.

PaleHoseGeorge
09-22-2003, 10:22 AM
Originally posted by Jerko
DIBBER, I think people are misunderstanding the Paniagua argument. THAT did not as much ruin the Sox season as it did IGNITE the Twins season. (even though igniting that team DID ruin the Sox season) My exact words that night were "Why give them any hope, you know how they are". That's what I'm pissed about. Had them down 1 game to 0, 8-2 in game 2 and then gave them a spark, some confidence. That was not unlike the Detroit game that the Sox lost 10-9 but came on strong at the end. That game gave the Sox a spark, why can't the same thing happen to the Twins? Also, ESPN themselves last night showed the records of both the Sox and Twins since Septemeber 9.

TWINS 11-1
SOX 3-8

September 9 was game 2 of the Minnesota series that Paniagua pitched in. So, since that game, the Twins are almost unbeatable and the Sox are clueless. I think that game had more of an effect than you think. I readily admit that a pro team should NOT let that happen, but we all know how powerful the collective psyche of the White Sox has been over the years.

Good point. Frankly I didn't realize how dramatically the fortunes of both teams changed after that game. Manuel stated that he needed to see what Paniaqua could do and figured protecting a fat lead late in the game was a good time to find out. I guess I agree with his assessment except for one obvious point: the opponent was the Twins, and the Twins needed to be beaten like drums. Don't forget--we still had two games left to play with them, plus another 3-game series the very next week.

There is time to test new things, and there is a time for going for the throat. As usual, Manuel has no clue how to tell the difference. That is yet another reason why he'll be the ex-Sox manager shortly.

kempsted
09-22-2003, 01:05 PM
Originally posted by wassagstdu
I hope this is the end of the Frank Thomas era too. I have had my fill of Home Run Derby ("It's a home run or nothing here on Home Run Derby..."). I like JM but any manager who either encourages or does not stop his hitters (ALL of them) from swinging from the heels at every pitch regardless of situation needs to be replaced. This whole season has been destroyed by a bunch of hitters looking out for their own numbers and not the team's W/L -- so they won't be blamed for the final result. Just like I am sure a whole bunch of people are shouting "It isn't Frank's fault!!"

You have to love people on this board. A couple of weeks ago Frank was so hot people were intentionally walking him to get to Ordonez. It certainly wasn't Franks fault completely. Yes he went cold. But he was cold earlier and they kept wining. The problem wasn't Frank it was 3-4-5 hitters not producing etc etc.

We were talking about Frank as MVP and now we think he should be dumped. :?: Hopefully Williams is smarter than wassagstdu or at least not as emotional.

Hangar18
09-22-2003, 01:55 PM
I'll always remember the lack of Fundamental Discipline his teams
always showed. And, despite the superior numbers that Frank put on when playing 1B, him playing Konerko there....

jeremyb1
09-22-2003, 05:05 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Okay, so let's take this to an extreme. You are 100% correct that the above example is unfair. No problem I admit it. You win.

What about the other 9 points? :D:

I agree with some of your points. That's what makes it so frustrating for me. We agree on the bottom line but I can't take your side because I think that way you make a lot of your arguments is incredibly unfair and biased and I find that to be irresponsible. On the bright side, I guess it won't be an issue much longer.

voodoochile
09-22-2003, 05:12 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
I agree with some of your points. That's what makes it so frustrating for me. We agree on the bottom line but I can't take your side because I think that way you make a lot of your arguments is incredibly unfair and biased and I find that to be irresponsible. On the bright side, I guess it won't be an issue much longer.

Actually, I think I have been pretty damned fair with JM this season. I haven't ripped him non-stop go for things outside of his control and I didn't start the season on the Fire JM bandwagon. I said all along that he needed to be able to get a team with that much talent to the playoffs. They failed to do it and he is a good part of the reason why they failed

I am glad we agree on the bottom line - firing JM is a good idea at this point in time. Nice to have you on-board the bandwagon. I think you were there for a longer time than you will admit, but have been playing devil's advocate to some extent. I agree with some of what you say. Somethings JM has been blamed for are outside his control or not really that big of a deal. However, I am not going to defend him on those points, because they are meaningless in the big picture. If there are enough valid reasons to dump a player or manager, then who cares if some people are taking it to and extreme and adding irrational evidence to the pile. The pile of reasons to fire Manuel is plenty big and unlike you I am not going to take the time to nitpick the 10 bad reasons in the pile. They are insignificant when there are 90 good reasons in there also...

Irishsox1
09-23-2003, 03:28 PM
With the execption if the first half of 2000, Jerry was a .500 manager. Under Jerry the teams would get super hot, but not for long plus they were prone to longer periods of sub par baseball. I don't blame him for the lack of offense during the 2000 playoffs, but after that series, I jumped off the Jerry Manual bandwagon. Now its time for a real manager. I always liked Larry Dierker.

jeremyb1
09-23-2003, 08:40 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
I am glad we agree on the bottom line - firing JM is a good idea at this point in time. Nice to have you on-board the bandwagon. I think you were there for a longer time than you will admit, but have been playing devil's advocate to some extent

I've been unopposed to firing JM since 4-6 weeks into the season. I've never really had a problem admitting that although I suppose I don't go out of my way to publisize it. I still have reservations but it seems inevitable at this point. I'm not sure we have that much to lose anymore so we'll see what happens.