PDA

View Full Version : Article on managerial candidates


soxtalker
10-13-2003, 10:06 AM
I don't recall seeing this posted, though it was from yesterday's Tribune. Not really anything new, but a run-down of the suspected candidates. Of course, KW is keeping everything tightly under wraps.

McKeon sings Guillen's praises (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-031012soxgreenstein,1,4086625.story?coll=cs-whitesox-headlines)

If one can believe this, it almost sounds like KW might prefer Gaston, and JR might prefer Ozzie.

poorme
10-13-2003, 10:08 AM
RE: Gaston

Minuses: Might be even more laid-back than the fired Jerry Manuel—and critics say he has less charisma. Was hesitant to use his bench in Toronto, which led to discontent among non-starters. Has been out of the game since 2001, when he lost his job as the Blue Jays' hitting coach. Said to be reluctant to manage a team with young players.

harwar
10-13-2003, 10:19 AM
This subject was mentioned briefly during yesterdays' ballgame by the fox broadcast team.They said that the White Sox needed to get some life in the duggout because the players & manager looked dead and lifeless.
Counting the days till spring training...

KingXerxes
10-13-2003, 10:25 AM
Ozzie Guillen is not the type of life they need in the dugout.

If he's hired, get ready for an unmitigated disaster of a baseball season in 2004.

hold2dibber
10-13-2003, 10:36 AM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Ozzie Guillen is not the type of life they need in the dugout.

If he's hired, get ready for an unmitigated disaster of a baseball season in 2004.

I couldn't agree more. I love Ozzie's enthusiasm for the game, but as far as handling a bullpen, handling players, etc. - I have no confidence that he would be capable.

In fact, I found the Trib article pretty depressing. Gaston doesn't sound like a good fit, Francona and Bell have never done anything to suggest to me that they're anything special. None of the candidates mentioned do anything for me.

Davey Johnson? Jim Leyland? Hell, I think I'd like Hargrove and possibly Backman more than any of the guys mentioned.

poorme
10-13-2003, 10:41 AM
Seeing the success of Jack McKeon, I think we should call Dick Williams.

TDog
10-13-2003, 10:51 AM
Originally posted by poorme
Seeing the success of Jack McKeon, I think we should call Dick Williams.

Dick Williams didn't have the respect of his players 25 years ago.

LASOXFAN
10-13-2003, 12:00 PM
Sparky Anderson!

soxnut
10-13-2003, 12:13 PM
I'd still take Ozzie, for the postitive reasons mentioned in the article.

As for the negatives, remember, they have retained almost the entire coaching staff. He's got Joe Nossek and Don Cooper on the bench for crying out loud, I think they know a little about baseball and how to handle a pitching staff. I'm sure that Ozzie would use their experience. I'm for the move, if it happens. :smile:

MarkEdward
10-13-2003, 12:16 PM
So, if I have this correct, Cito Gaston was Toronto's hitting coach from 1998-2001. For what it's worth, here's how Toronto's offense did during his tenure:

1998: 8th in AL, runs scored
1999: 5th in AL, runs scored
2000: 8th in AL, runs scrored
2001: 9th in AL, runs scored

During this time, the team's OBP hovered around .335 while playing in a mostly neutral park. Of course there are other factors involved, but that's not too impressive.

By the way, Sparky Anderson is younger than McKeon, so maybe he can be coaxed out of retirement...

soxtalker
10-13-2003, 12:36 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
I couldn't agree more. I love Ozzie's enthusiasm for the game, but as far as handling a bullpen, handling players, etc. - I have no confidence that he would be capable.


I don't know what to think. I've heard this sort of comment from several posters, and I'd have to agree that he doesn't seem to have the experience on which to base any confidence. Having said that, he could be fine. We just don't know.

If the choice is just among those in the Tribune article, I guess that I'd lean toward Ozzie. Of course, KW could have several other choices in mind that he's just not telling us about. Again, the most interesting conclusion that I drew from the article was that KW might favor Cito and JR might favor Ozzie. But even that is conjecture!

KingXerxes
10-13-2003, 01:43 PM
If the White Sox are thinking of actually hiring Ozzie Guillen, then it is only fair that they interview Max Patkin.

Forget Guillen's potential handling of pitchers, or his knowledge of the game. The man possesses absolutely none of the intangible attributes that the White Sox require in a manager. They need a manager that all of the players will respect and follow. Guillen will sit in the dugout and act goofy all in the name of keeping the team loose. That's fine if you're a third base coach and the team is going along well, but can you imagine a guy like Frank Thomas (who played with Guillen for sveral years) actually going along with the schtick if the team hits a rough spot? There's no way. And don't even get me started on dealing with the media (which is a very under-rated attribute of all managers). This guy would go to press conferences and act goofy - again which is fine if you're merrily rolling along - and it would be a matter of minutes before he got ripped wide open.

Do not hire Ozzie Guillen to manage this club.

Period.

poorme
10-13-2003, 01:54 PM
Guillen played hard and had fun. Imagine what a disaster that would be - if we had team that played hard and had fun.

KingXerxes
10-13-2003, 02:06 PM
A lot of players have played hard through the years, and had a lot of fun doing it. Mike Kekich and Fritz Peterson above all, but I'm not sure theywould have made good managers.

If Ozzie Guillen were planning to manage AND play all nine positions then maybe you have a point, but to project that his "Happy Go Lucky" attitude will become infectious and spread to the entire team is dreaming. If this team started 0-3, and he were spotted in the dugout making shadow puppets and cracking everybody up - his tenure would be over by week's end. Players would turn on him in a second, and the media would dance on his grave.

Go ahead, hire him - but don't say you weren't warned.

jeremyb1
10-13-2003, 03:32 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
If Ozzie Guillen were planning to manage AND play all nine positions then maybe you have a point, but to project that his "Happy Go Lucky" attitude will become infectious and spread to the entire team is dreaming. If this team started 0-3, and he were spotted in the dugout making shadow puppets and cracking everybody up - his tenure would be over by week's end. Players would turn on him in a second, and the media would dance on his grave.


Its funny to see people say that because my thoughts were that Ozzie's ability to keep things loose would be his best attribute. It seems to me that this team's biggest problem the last few years has been failing to win when their backs are against the wall. It seems to me that they've been pressing way too much trying to live up to expecations and save Manuel's job. I don't see why it'd be impossible to keep a team loose in the middle of a losing streak. It might help them from spiraling further out of control.

TornLabrum
10-13-2003, 04:08 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
A lot of players have played hard through the years, and had a lot of fun doing it. Mike Kekich and Fritz Peterson above all, but I'm not sure theywould have made good managers.

If I'm not mistaken, Fritz did some coaching at NIU (where he went to college). He and Kekich did have some interesting passtimes.

dllrbll7
10-13-2003, 04:32 PM
Could there be any other canidates we havent heard of yet? I know multiple people speculated Joe Torre if he loses his job? Any one else out there that would be a long shot but still a posibiltiy?

KingXerxes
10-13-2003, 04:56 PM
As far as Ozzie Guillen keeping a team loose - I doubt it. Keeping a team loose is a matter of instilling confidence more than it's a matter of clowning around.

I ask everybody to reach back into the furthest recesses of their memories, and point out any manager that even reached mediocre levels of acheivement by using the "Slap Happy Clown" approach of management. It works - on a short term basis - and only if used as a distraction by a minor actor (like a third base coach on a team of youngsters, and only then as a comedic foil to offset a 72 year-old crusty veteran manager). This guy is Patrick Buttram without Gene Autry - it won't work because he is, and forever will be a support player.

Win1ForMe
10-13-2003, 05:15 PM
I'm not sure if I agree with all the anti-Ozzie sentiment. Manuel's biggest failures this year were his inability to motivate his team for certain periods of the season. Sure, he lost some games because of dumb moves but I think any manager over the course of 162 games will make mistakes.

The Sox did not play well against the bad teams and that is a clear indication of Manuel's failure to "inspire the troops." And after watching the Minnesota series, it's also clear that the Sox have some of the tightest rectums in baseball. I think Ozzie's personality would really help our team in this regard.

Xerxes, consider if the Sox started the season 0-3 with Gaston as the manager. Everyone would be all over Gaston because of his laid-back approach. He'd be buried faster than Ozzie.

If anything, Guillen would have a much longer grace period.

Personally, I hope there are other candidates than the ones described in the article. But of the four listed, I would say Ozzie is my choice.

MRKARNO
10-13-2003, 05:41 PM
Originally posted by Win1ForMe
I'm not sure if I agree with all the anti-Ozzie sentiment. Manuel's biggest failures this year were his inability to motivate his team for certain periods of the season. Sure, he lost some games because of dumb moves but I think any manager over the course of 162 games will make mistakes.

The Sox did not play well against the bad teams and that is a clear indication of Manuel's failure to "inspire the troops." And after watching the Minnesota series, it's also clear that the Sox have some of the tightest rectums in baseball. I think Ozzie's personality would really help our team in this regard.

Xerxes, consider if the Sox started the season 0-3 with Gaston as the manager. Everyone would be all over Gaston because of his laid-back approach. He'd be buried faster than Ozzie.

If anything, Guillen would have a much longer grace period.

Personally, I hope there are other candidates than the ones described in the article. But of the four listed, I would say Ozzie is my choice.

You cant teach enthusiasm. You can be taught how to manage a bullpen. Luckily we have a bench coach who can help out Ozzie if hired. Hire Ozzie for the enthusiasm and Nossak will help Ozzie learn how to manage correctly and not make dumb mistakes.

jeremyb1
10-13-2003, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
As far as Ozzie Guillen keeping a team loose - I doubt it. Keeping a team loose is a matter of instilling confidence more than it's a matter of clowning around.

I ask everybody to reach back into the furthest recesses of their memories, and point out any manager that even reached mediocre levels of acheivement by using the "Slap Happy Clown" approach of management. It works - on a short term basis - and only if used as a distraction by a minor actor (like a third base coach on a team of youngsters, and only then as a comedic foil to offset a 72 year-old crusty veteran manager). This guy is Patrick Buttram without Gene Autry - it won't work because he is, and forever will be a support player.

I'm not really familiar with managers that fit that description. Most managers tend to be intense screamers (Pinella, apparently Backman) or the more laid back, stoic type (Manuel, Alou, Gaston).

hold2dibber
10-13-2003, 05:50 PM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
You cant teach enthusiasm. You can be taught how to manage a bullpen. Luckily we have a bench coach who can help out Ozzie if hired. Hire Ozzie for the enthusiasm and Nossak will help Ozzie learn how to manage correctly and not make dumb mistakes.

I'm not sure that enthusiasm is what this team needs. It needs focus, motivation and desire. I don't think a happy-go-lucky, rah-rah, jokester like Ozzie is going to instill the killer instinct and urgency that this team so sorely lacks. I don't think he's the right choice.

oheeoh...magglio
10-13-2003, 05:51 PM
Originally posted by poorme
Guillen played hard and had fun. Imagine what a disaster that would be - if we had team that played hard and had fun.

Yeah, I don't understand all the negativity towards Ozzie. If he got a good coaching staff around him, I think he could do a good job. But hey, I don't know a whole lot about stuff outside of the players, so that's just my opinion.

chisoxt
10-13-2003, 06:15 PM
If one can believe this, it almost sounds like KW might prefer Gaston, and JR might prefer Ozzie.

Hiring someone as inexperienced as Guiilen fits right into the type of 'Gimmick' hires that the Sox are famous for.....let's see...in the past, we've had the 'Let's hire an announcer as GM hire, the let's hire a minority GM hire, the let's hire the cheapest most inexperienced lap dog manager hires, now we need the let's hire the goofy ex-player as manager hire.

It amazes me that the Sox are always crying poor as being an organization of limited means. Ok you business school graduates out there, wouldn't it make the most sense that if you do have limited resources, to get the most out of what you have by hiring the best people (See Oakland Athletics)?

poorme
10-13-2003, 07:01 PM
"Happy go lucky" is the wrong adjective. That means he didn't care if the sox won or lost. He did. He'd get the red-a#@ and get in the faces of other players. Gregarious or jocular would be more appropriate.

vegyrex
10-13-2003, 07:03 PM
Originally posted by LASOXFAN
Sparky Anderson!

Yep, I agree! Before they hired Manuel, I wanted Sparky.

Unfortunately I don't think KW will be going for the gold. He may reach for tin instead. :(:

Daver
10-13-2003, 07:06 PM
Originally posted by LASOXFAN
Sparky Anderson!

Well hell,go a step up and get Casey Stengal..........

crector
10-13-2003, 09:22 PM
What those who oppose Ozzie for manager on the grounds that he is too fun-loving and not enough in-your-face hard-edge attitude is that the Sox once had such a tough character as manager.

His name was Terry Bevington.

Having a certain kind of attitude is not necessarily enough. Knowledge of the game and the ability to make good, snap decisions is. Plus, Ozzie knows a lot of the players and as such, he should be able to establish rapport with them.

Let's give Ozzie a try and see where that takes us.

Lip Man 1
10-13-2003, 11:25 PM
Just wondering....

With the Cubs a kiss away from the World Series and the White Sox about to become even more ignored in Chicago then they already are, can this franchise afford to "take a chance" on anybody?

Lip

longshot7
10-14-2003, 03:24 AM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
You can be taught how to manage a bullpen. Luckily we have a bench coach who can help out Ozzie if hired. Hire Ozzie for the enthusiasm and Nossak will help Ozzie learn how to manage correctly and not make dumb mistakes.

Did it work for Jerry?





That's what I thought.

toledosoxfan
10-14-2003, 07:29 AM
None of these candidates get me excited. If the Sox want to win in 2004, hiring a manager with experience in winning championships is preferable than taking a chance on somebody to learn on the job. If the choice had to be either Ozzie or Gaston, I would prefer Gaston even though he may be more laid back than Jerry.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-14-2003, 08:06 AM
I think we'll be doing quite well if we can simply pry open Reinsdorf's wallet enough to get a manager that has some honest to goodness experience-- and success-- managing a major league baseball team. That would put us head and shoulders in a better place than after the last three managers were hired: Lamont, Bevington, and Manuel.

If LaRussa isn't a available, I would be satisfied settling for Gaston. What I liked about him in Toronto was his use of set lineups. Everyone knew exactly which 8 guys were taking the field for the Blue Jays practically all season long. No lame excuses for tinkering:

:jerry
"He looks tired [2 days before the all-star break]."
"He went to school near here."
"We need to build up his confidence."
"My job is to make everyone comfortable."

twang ---------------------------------->thump :jerry

Unless Gaston has been keeping up on the A.L., we can expect him to make mistakes with matchups his first year. If he is a really good student, he'll learn a whole lot faster and we'll have a chance to compete. Otherwise...

:ohno
"Wait till next year's next year..."

soxtalker
10-14-2003, 09:13 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Just wondering....

With the Cubs a kiss away from the World Series and the White Sox about to become even more ignored in Chicago then they already are, can this franchise afford to "take a chance" on anybody?

Lip

Looking back on the discussion that we've had on the board over the past two weeks, I haven't heard one name that everyone likes. So, in some respects, we will be "taking a chance" in the eyes of many fans no matter what the choice.

dooda
10-14-2003, 10:14 AM
Originally posted by toledosoxfan
None of these candidates get me excited. If the Sox want to win in 2004, hiring a manager with experience in winning championships is preferable than taking a chance on somebody to learn on the job. If the choice had to be either Ozzie or Gaston, I would prefer Gaston even though he may be more laid back than Jerry.


AMEN! My first choice would be a guy who has won more than one championship, preferably with more than one team, preferably in the Major Leagues. My second choice would be a minor league manager who has won championships at more than one level.

Winning requires several factors. Talent is among those factors but is not the over riding factor. In a 162 game schedule you have to be able to win games when the talent matchups are not in your favor if you plan on playing in the post season. Doing that requires an understanding of how to win games, and a knowledge of how not to lose games. That knowledge is where the manager comes in. I want to the manager the Sox hire to be someone who has a track record of multiple successes to prove it was not a fluke or overwhelming talent. I don't care if the multiple successes came in the majors or the minors. Winning is winning. Experience is nice, but experience without success is just experience.

Who is out there? I don't know. Tom Kelly comes to mind. Jim Leyland. Cito Gaston. Some minor league manager not in our farm system I don't care who it is as long as he has proved more than once he can win.

We don't need a manager who needs on the job training.

mrwag
10-14-2003, 01:08 PM
What are the Yankee/Torre relations right now? Any chance of him in a different set of pinstripes?

Mammoo
10-14-2003, 01:12 PM
Originally posted by poorme
Seeing the success of Jack McKeon, I think we should call Dick Williams.

Hell, Al Lopez is still alive!!! :smile:

AsInWreck
10-14-2003, 06:45 PM
Originally posted by toledosoxfan
If the choice had to be either Ozzie or Gaston, I would prefer Gaston even though he may be more laid back than Jerry.

I always thought the problem w/ jerry was that he was a bonehead w/o a clear managerial concept, not that he was laidback. I damn sure never threw my beer at the TV because he was laidback.

Tragg
10-14-2003, 11:33 PM
That's what they said about Pena - fast and loose - they faded like 1968 tie-dyed jeans.
The problem I see with Guillen is that he, as a player, possessed the weaknesses this team has in triplicate - complete lack of patience at the plate and refusing to take a walk. So we bring in a manager who showed no patience and wouldn't walk. I don't think so.