PDA

View Full Version : Worst.Manager.Ever...


Risk
11-04-2003, 06:25 PM
Since everyone's on the manager kick right now after the hiring of Guillen, let me pose this question---Who was the worst manager the Sox have had all-time?

I know that my sox knowledge is limited to the 14yrs. I've been a fan and my 26 yrs on this good green Earth, yet my vote is still by a landslide----Terry Bevington.

Risk

oheeoh...magglio
11-04-2003, 06:26 PM
I also have limited sox knowledge as pertaining to our history of managers, but it HAS to be Terry Bevington, I can't imagine there being anybody worse.

Daver
11-04-2003, 06:28 PM
Originally posted by oheeoh...magglio
I also have limited sox knowledge as pertaining to our history of managers, but it HAS to be Terry Bevington, I can't imagine there being anybody worse.

Ozzie will get his chance to outdo Bev.

MikeKreevich
11-04-2003, 06:32 PM
Originally posted by Daver
Ozzie will get his chance to outdo Bev.
Are you suggesting that he will?

john2499
11-04-2003, 07:32 PM
Bevington was not the worst. He was actually around .500.

How about Don Gutteridge.

MRKARNO
11-04-2003, 07:46 PM
Originally posted by Daver
Ozzie will get his chance to outdo Bev.

I really hope that your ridiculous amount of negativity about Guillen is wrong

idseer
11-04-2003, 08:05 PM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
I really hope that your ridiculous amount of negativity about Guillen is wrong

ditto!


as to worse manager ever ...
using over 100 games and using won/loss records only admittedly not the real judge of 'worst', i find that jack onslow who managed in '49 & '50 was 71 - 113. ted lyons (former sox player btw) was 185 - 245 from '46 thru '48.

the worst in my own sox watching life was jim fregosi. btween '86 & 88 he was 193 - 226.

bevington was surely hated by a lot of people but he did have a winning record!

jortafan
11-04-2003, 08:11 PM
I go back to the days of Dick Allen, and I can't imagine anything being worse than the second coming of Paul Richards. 1976 was just awful.

doogiec
11-04-2003, 08:51 PM
Originally posted by jortafan
I go back to the days of Dick Allen, and I can't imagine anything being worse than the second coming of Paul Richards. 1976 was just awful.

As soon as I saw this thread I thought the same thing. Richards was actually caught sleeping in the dugout a couple of times during games.

And in second place, I nominate Don Kessinger. And not just because he's a former Cub. He was the Jimmy Carter of major league managers.

mike squires
11-04-2003, 09:50 PM
I don't know if Bevington was the worst ever. I remember him not knowing how to deal with the media and probably didn't have the best communication with the players/media BUT his fight with Phil Garner was classic. I'll never forget watching his eyes bug out of his head intent on killing him. I love fiery manager like that. I went to an Angle game once in 86 (I think) the day Walker had his seizure sp?...Fregosi picked up third base and threw it. I didn't care for Fregosi either.

lowesox
11-04-2003, 10:02 PM
Originally posted by Daver
Ozzie will get his chance to outdo Bev.


Why is everybody assuming Ozzie is going to be so bad? The only possible reason could be that he has no experience. But if you look at the kind of player he was you can tell he has the makeup of a good manager. Besides, after years and years of being around the game I don't think it matters whether your experience is as a manager or a player.

Ozzie will be an amazing coach. Anybody who's being outwardly negative about him right now is just setting themselves up to looking silly later.

MarkEdward
11-04-2003, 10:15 PM
Originally posted by lowesox
Why is everybody assuming Ozzie is going to be so bad?

Maybe because he was the total embodiment of how not to be a good baseball player?

idseer
11-04-2003, 11:19 PM
Originally posted by MarkEdward
Maybe because he was the total embodiment of how not to be a good baseball player?

the total embodiment huh?

now ozzie wasn't even a good ballplayer. 16 seasons as a starting major league shortstop including 3 time allstar and rookie of the year. and you say he was the embodiment of a bad ball player.

some of you have lost it! (or maybe never had it)

TornLabrum
11-04-2003, 11:35 PM
Originally posted by idseer
the total embodiment huh?

now ozzie wasn't even a good ballplayer. 16 seasons as a starting major league shortstop including 3 time allstar and rookie of the year. and you say he was the embodiment of a bad ball player.

some of you have lost it! (or maybe never had it)

I'm glad I've been so busy the past few days. I don't think I could have stood all of the hyperbole that has been flying around. The few posts I've read have me shaking my head.

StepsInSC
11-04-2003, 11:40 PM
Originally posted by MarkEdward
Maybe because he was the total embodiment of how not to be a good baseball player?

:hitless
"Uh...yes...ahem....ahem!"

Lip Man 1
11-04-2003, 11:40 PM
I go back to 1955 and from the managers that I remember the worst was:

Don Gutteridge then Jerry Manuel then Larry Doby.

In my opinion.

Right on Hal!

Lip

crector
11-05-2003, 04:05 AM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
I'm glad I've been so busy the past few days. I don't think I could have stood all of the hyperbole that has been flying around. The few posts I've read have me shaking my head.


And what of all the hyperbole that this Hal Vickery character has been throwing around here at WSI ("General Disarray," "Professor Chaos")? What did you ever say about that? You must have been really shaking your head after reading Hal's hyperbole-laden pieces. Didn't you?

Oh, that's right.

Never mind.

34rancher
11-05-2003, 08:32 AM
Originally posted by mike squires
I don't know if Bevington was the worst ever. I remember him not knowing how to deal with the media and probably didn't have the best communication with the players/media BUT his fight with Phil Garner was classic. I'll never forget watching his eyes bug out of his head intent on killing him. I love fiery manager like that. I went to an Angle game once in 86 (I think) the day Walker had his seizure sp?...Fregosi picked up third base and threw it. I didn't care for Fregosi either.
Yeah but Fregosi, Richards, and the rest never called for a pitching change on their way out to the mound with no one warming up......
IDIOT!!!!

Procol Harum
11-05-2003, 09:58 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
I go back to 1955 and from the managers that I remember the worst was:

Don Gutteridge then Jerry Manuel then Larry Doby.

In my opinion.

Right on Hal!

Lip

This is the 2nd mention of Don Gutteridge as worst all-time Sox manager. I was around then, but remember the train wreck that was the Sox at that point as being more about an aging, dwindling talent pool and a sharp decline in attendance and revenue stemming from the racial situation at the time, the move to UHF, and the general loss of Chicago fans' interest. On the up-side, Gutteridge had been a long-time baseball man and Al Lopez' right-hand man for a number of years. And I can remember sentiment at the time Stanky was hired that Gutteridge deserved a shot as manager.

So, can you give me some specific instances of the mistakes and misguided policies which would have made Gutteridge a manager that was worse than Doby and Manuel (and I can't believe you left Bevington out of that mix)? I'm not arguing that DG was an unrecognized managerial titan, but have real trouble viewing him as the absolute worst manager the Sox have ever had.

washington
11-05-2003, 10:06 AM
Originally posted by Procol Harum
So, can you give me some specific instances of the mistakes and misguided policies which would have made Gutteridge a manager that was worse than Doby and Manuel (and I can't believe you left Bevington out of that mix)?

Gutteridge is getting bashed unfairly, he had 2 horrible horrible teams to manage. Bevington has to get the nod as worst ever, if only for the time he brought in Foulke when he hadn't warmed up. Kessinger and Doby were also pitiful.

Lew Fonseca could be the worst, he guided the squad to a 49-102 record in 1932. He went on to be a scout & coach for the Scrubs.

Wanne
11-05-2003, 10:39 AM
Plus....Gutteridge had to wear those goofy-ass shorts with the collared unis. That wasn't a pretty sight at all!

TDog
11-05-2003, 12:02 PM
Originally posted by Wanne
Plus....Gutteridge had to wear those goofy-ass shorts with the collared unis. That wasn't a pretty sight at all!

What???

Don Gutteridge was fired late in the 1970 season. According to the Tribune, he was surprised. The next year, the Sox changed its image with Chuck Tanner and the red pinstripes. When Bill Veeck returned in 1976, he said he couldn't understand why the Sox were wearing red and put them in the uniforms that everyone remembers for he shorts (which were modeled for the media in the offseason but only worn once, for the second game of an August doubleheader).

Gutteridge had been a Gashouse Gang teammate of Leo Durocher. He had been a scrappy player with a scrappy team and long-time Sox coach. He was one of the base coaches in 1959. Bill Melton has said that the problem with Gutteridge as manager was that he went from being a buddy-coach to the boss.

I didn't understand the intricacies of baseball as well the year that I became a teenager. I can only cite one instance of horrific managing. He once brought in a pitcher (Cisco Carlos?) to issue an intentional walk, after which he pulled him. Bob Elson and Red Rush made excuses about how the IBB pitcher might have felt better on the mound and would be less likely to throw a wild pitch. I'm not even sure Gutteridge was managing at that time. I I do think Gutteridge should have played Walt "No-Neck" Williams more, though.

A couple of other points.

If Jim Fregosi ever threw third base, he was copying Tony LaRussa, who did it in a game against Baltimore in 1983.

Bob Lemmon was caught sleeping in the Sox dugout in 1977. Maybe Paul Richards had worked a comfortable groove into the bench.

If you want to go to the worst manager of all-time, or at least in the last 30 or 40 years, you need to look at Maury Wills with the Seattle Mariners. I don't know what his win-loss record was, but he made idiotic decisions, didn't seem to understand the rules of baseball and had the players in open revolt.

washington
11-05-2003, 12:14 PM
Paul Richards was manager in 1976 when the team wore shorts. I thought they only did it for 1 game (during a doubleheader), but IIRC Richards & someone else wore the shorts before the season for the press when they "unveiled" the new uniforms.

MarkV
11-05-2003, 12:52 PM
Jerry Manuel-Worst Manager Ever.

MarkEdward
11-05-2003, 01:47 PM
Originally posted by idseer
the total embodiment huh?

now ozzie wasn't even a good ballplayer. 16 seasons as a starting major league shortstop including 3 time allstar and rookie of the year. and you say he was the embodiment of a bad ball player.


Of course. He was a horrible player.

To be fair, he played adequate defense. But his defensive contributions do not make up for his awful offensive numbers.

vegyrex
11-05-2003, 01:56 PM
Gutteridge
Kessinger
Bevington

poorme
11-05-2003, 02:15 PM
Originally posted by MarkEdward
Of course. He was a horrible player.

That's absurd. Even SABR savior Bill James ranks him as the 74th best SS of all time. Not bad when you think of all the people who have ever played the position.

nasox
11-05-2003, 02:45 PM
YOu gotta change this thread title. It sounds like another ozzie sucks forum, if thats possible.

Risk
11-05-2003, 03:40 PM
Ooops....Sorry :)

It wasn't meant to be another "Ozzie sucks" thread. Just a thread of who is the worst Sox manager of all-time.

Risk

vegyrex
11-05-2003, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by nasox
YOu gotta change this thread title. It sounds like another ozzie sucks forum, if thats possible.

Wait until May. This place will be full of them. http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/happy/biglaugh2.gif

nasox
11-05-2003, 04:29 PM
Originally posted by vegyrex
Wait until May. This place will be full of them.

Well I for one think Ozzie is our SAVIOR!!! HAIL TO THE CHIEF

jortafan
11-05-2003, 06:17 PM
Originally posted by nasox
Well I for one think Ozzie is our SAVIOR!!! HAIL TO THE CHIEF I thought Jesus (Alou) was the savior

TornLabrum
11-05-2003, 10:42 PM
Originally posted by crector
And what of all the hyperbole that this Hal Vickery character has been throwing around here at WSI ("General Disarray," "Professor Chaos")? What did you ever say about that? You must have been really shaking your head after reading Hal's hyperbole-laden pieces. Didn't you?

Oh, that's right.

Never mind.

So you're of the minority opinion that a) the trade for an aging, overweight David Wells was a good thing; b) trading three arms for Todd Ritchie was a brilliant move; and c) Jerry Manuel was a competent manager. Or maybe you just need to look up the meaning of hyperbole because it seems to me that Mr. Vickery's interpretations of events were spot on.

crector
11-06-2003, 04:00 AM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
So you're of the minority opinion that a) the trade for an aging, overweight David Wells was a good thing; b) trading three arms for Todd Ritchie was a brilliant move; and c) Jerry Manuel was a competent manager. Or maybe you just need to look up the meaning of hyperbole because it seems to me that Mr. Vickery's interpretations of events were spot on.


You are confusing hyperbole with opinions. I have few disagreements with the opinions that Vickery expresses in his articles. However, Vickery used an awful lot of hyperbole in expressing those opinions. The fact that you criticized folks who are upset with JR/KW over their appointing a nincompoop as manager just when it appeared that the White Sox were poised for greatness in 2004 for using a little hyperbole without ever criticizing Mr. Hyperbole Monger aka Hal Vickery is more than just a little bit inconsistent.

CiscoCarlos
11-06-2003, 09:18 AM
A dishonorable mention goes to Donie Bush whose lack of managerial skills may have driven Comiskey the First to his grave.
In 1930 and 1931 Bush was 62-92 and 56-97 respectively with the very pale hose. Comiskey died a few days after Bush quit.

Mind you Bush had tough competition over the years from Gutteridge and Doby.

In the 20s, The Sox made a series of botched manager choices -- hired because they were popular players with the Sox during their day, not because of any proven managerial skills. It was thought they would help revive the dwindling fan base. Among the failures: Ed Walsh, Eddie Collins and Lena Blackburne.

Let's hope Ozzie doesn't fall in this category.

ondafarm
11-06-2003, 10:53 AM
Of the serious managers I'd have to say Tony Larussa was worst. He had a lot of talent to work with and did remararkably little in terms of playoff appearances. And then there's the whole strike season thing. If he keeps his mouth shut about the Sox throwing games, they would have been in the playoffs. Instead he blabs and the Sox fall out of contention. Tony's gotten better but he's no genius. If he was with the talent St Louis had, they'd have won the NL central. I saw the 86 WS and Lasorda completely outclassed Larussa in every aspect of management.

crector
11-06-2003, 11:00 AM
Originally posted by ondafarm
Of the serious managers I'd have to say Tony Larussa was worst. He had a lot of talent to work with and did remararkably little in terms of playoff appearances. And then there's the whole strike season thing. If he keeps his mouth shut about the Sox throwing games, they would have been in the playoffs. Instead he blabs and the Sox fall out of contention. Tony's gotten better but he's no genius. If he was with the talent St Louis had, they'd have won the NL central. I saw the 86 WS and Lasorda completely outclassed Larussa in every aspect of management.

You must be mistaken. The 1986 World Series pitted the BoSox vs. the N.Y. Mets. Lasorda & LaRussa managed neither team.

MisterB
11-06-2003, 11:18 AM
Originally posted by crector
You must be mistaken. The 1986 World Series pitted the BoSox vs. the N.Y. Mets. Lasorda & LaRussa managed neither team.

He means 1988, not 1986.

TDog
11-06-2003, 11:27 AM
Originally posted by MisterB
He means 1988, not 1986.

And by outmanaging, he means bringing in an injured pinch-hitter to face baseball's best reliever with the game on the line.

Lip Man 1
11-06-2003, 12:51 PM
Onthefarm:

For the record Whitey Herzog said the same things and threatened to lose games with the Caridnals if that would help them get into the bizarre split season playoffs.

LaRussa did very well in my book with winning seasons in 1981, 1982,1983 and 1985.

At that time you had to go back to the 60's the last time the Sox had three consecutive winning years.

He could manage for me anyday of the week and twice on Sunday. Especially given the fact that the last competent Sox manager was Jeff Torborg.

Lip

crector
11-06-2003, 01:46 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Especially given the fact that the last competent Sox manager was Jeff Torborg.

Lip


If Torborg was so good, then why was he unable to get the Sox into the playoffs, but his successor Gene Lamont was able to?

poorme
11-06-2003, 02:07 PM
Originally posted by crector
If Torborg was so good, then why was he unable to get the Sox into the playoffs, but his successor Gene Lamont was able to?

Are you related to Gene Lamont?

ondafarm
11-06-2003, 02:23 PM
Originally posted by MisterB
He means 1988, not 1986.

Quite right. I sit corrected.

Thank you.

Lip Man 1
11-06-2003, 09:52 PM
Because Lamont came in at the right time after Torborg did the groundwork.

and I contend the Sox would have won in 91 had Ron "Jumbotron" Schueler made some moves at the deadline when the Sox were three out. Instead he did nothing. The Sox went into a funk around the middle of August where they lost 13 of 17 and lost their chances.

Lip

TornLabrum
11-07-2003, 12:25 AM
Originally posted by crector
You are confusing hyperbole with opinions. I have few disagreements with the opinions that Vickery expresses in his articles. However, Vickery used an awful lot of hyperbole in expressing those opinions. The fact that you criticized folks who are upset with JR/KW over their appointing a nincompoop as manager just when it appeared that the White Sox were poised for greatness in 2004 for using a little hyperbole without ever criticizing Mr. Hyperbole Monger aka Hal Vickery is more than just a little bit inconsistent.

Of course assuming that Mr. Guillen is a nincompoop is based on his detractors' intimate relationship with him. Correct?

I've actually sat at a table with Mr. Guillen, and I consider myself to be reasonbly intelligent, having reached the level of a Master's degree and having majored in chemistry and minored in mathematics. I found Mr. Guillen to be anything but a nincompoop.

Of course, you do know what they say about opinions, don't you?

BTW, your post was nearly unintelligible, so I'm simply responding to what I think you said.

crector
11-07-2003, 07:59 AM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
Of course assuming that Mr. Guillen is a nincompoop is based on his detractors' intimate relationship with him. Correct?

I've actually sat at a table with Mr. Guillen, and I consider myself to be reasonbly intelligent, having reached the level of a Master's degree and having majored in chemistry and minored in mathematics. I found Mr. Guillen to be anything but a nincompoop.

Of course, you do know what they say about opinions, don't you?

BTW, your post was nearly unintelligible, so I'm simply responding to what I think you said.

Well, I've met and talked to Ozzie on more than 1 occaision and am distinctly unimpressed. I have a M.A. in History myself, so don't go around throwing around your credentials to make yourself look better than the rest of us.

You're quite good with put downs and insults and facile analysis. That being the case, you should apply to be a columnist with the Sun-Times. After all, they hired Jay Mariotti, so you should fit right it.


In any event, I'm looking forward to reading Mr. Vickery's pieces next year when Ozzie falls flat on his face. Will Vickery have the courage to come out and admit that he made an error in judgement or will he blame it all on "The Chairman" and "Professor Chaos"?

ondafarm
11-07-2003, 08:02 AM
Originally posted by TDog
And by outmanaging, he means bringing in an injured pinch-hitter to face baseball's best reliever with the game on the line.

Who promptly hit the ball over the wall and won the game. Yes, I call that outmanaging.

moochpuppy
11-07-2003, 09:03 AM
As bad as Bevington was he still managed two .500 clubs. Just think how good they could have been with a decent manager.

voodoochile
11-07-2003, 10:46 AM
Originally posted by crector
Well, I've met and talked to Ozzie on more than 1 occaision and am distinctly unimpressed. I have a M.A. in History myself, so don't go around throwing around your credentials to make yourself look better than the rest of us.

You're quite good with put downs and insults and facile analysis. That being the case, you should apply to be a columnist with the Sun-Times. After all, they hired Jay Mariotti, so you should fit right it.


In any event, I'm looking forward to reading Mr. Vickery's pieces next year when Ozzie falls flat on his face. Will Vickery have the courage to come out and admit that he made an error in judgement or will he blame it all on "The Chairman" and "Professor Chaos"?

You do realize that you are responding to Mr. Vickery, don't you?

crector
11-07-2003, 11:01 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile
You do realize that you are responding to Mr. Vickery, don't you?


Well of course I do. Anything wrong with that?

voodoochile
11-07-2003, 11:08 AM
Originally posted by crector
Well of course I do. Anything wrong with that?

No, but you kept referring to him in the third person, which was weird...

TDog
11-07-2003, 12:08 PM
Originally posted by ondafarm
Who promptly hit the ball over the wall and won the game. Yes, I call that outmanaging.

Obviously you missed my point.

Lasorda made an against-all-odds desperation move that ended up winning the game. He wasn't holding back a Gibson home run for the end of the game. Gibson wasn't "lucky" to hit the home run by any means, but Lasorda's managing that night was more the result of luck than genius.

ondafarm
11-07-2003, 01:27 PM
Originally posted by TDog
Obviously you missed my point.


I agree. I did miss your point. I've heard Lasorda talk about this particular move and he said he knew Gibson couldn't run. He also said he reminded Gibson that nothing but a homer would work and Gibson said "I know."

Gibson went up there swinging for the fence. This was a gamble, but a well-thought out one. Gibson figured he could take Eckersley deep. Lasorda knew Eck couldn't be shaving the ball in a WS game and that would flatten it out. He knew Gibson hit flat balls really well.

The Dodgers also ran the A's ragged in the series, Billy Hatcher stealing far more than his mediocre speed should have permitted. I'm assuming you're going to say Lasorda got extremely lucky on calling exactly the right pitch, series long, to run on.

Bunk. Lasorda blows Tony away as a manager.

Lip Man 1
11-07-2003, 01:28 PM
When Bevington took over for Lamont in May of 95, I don't think he finished with a .500 record that season.

In 96 he ended up with an 85 - 77 record after being I think eighteen or twenty games over .500 in early June.

Lip

ondafarm
11-07-2003, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by moochpuppy
As bad as Bevington was he still managed two .500 clubs. Just think how good they could have been with a decent manager.

With a better manager Tony Larussa's clubs would have made it to the WS several times, not just had winning seasons. He had quite an offensive lineup, good starting pitching and no skill at using a bullpen.

ondafarm
11-07-2003, 01:34 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Onthefarm:

For the record Whitey Herzog said the same things and threatened to lose games with the Caridnals if that would help them get into the bizarre split season playoffs.



Herzog said it after Larussa had blabbed to the Trib in a front page article when directly questioned about it by a Sporting News reporter. The Sox and Cards happened to be in the same situation, second after a much tougher early schedule. Herzog also said "Of course I'd do it; anything to make the playoffs. But I would advertise that."

Larussa was dumb. Herzog merely confirmed.

TornLabrum
11-07-2003, 05:09 PM
Originally posted by crector
Well, I've met and talked to Ozzie on more than 1 occaision and am distinctly unimpressed. I have a M.A. in History myself, so don't go around throwing around your credentials to make yourself look better than the rest of us.

You're quite good with put downs and insults and facile analysis. That being the case, you should apply to be a columnist with the Sun-Times. After all, they hired Jay Mariotti, so you should fit right it.


In any event, I'm looking forward to reading Mr. Vickery's pieces next year when Ozzie falls flat on his face. Will Vickery have the courage to come out and admit that he made an error in judgement or will he blame it all on "The Chairman" and "Professor Chaos"?

I hope when you talked to Ozzie, it was about baseball. That was the topic of discussion when I've talked to him. As for my throwing around my credentials, my point was that I consider myself to be reasonably intelligent and think I can recognize that trait in others.

I do wish to apologize for the insults. I was very tired and in a pretty bad mood when I replied to your last post, and it's beneath me, at least beneath the way I was brought up to behave.

With that said, might I suggest that you go back and read Mr. Vickery's "endorsement" of Mr. Guillen as manager? Here is the exact quote I would like you to pay particular attention to (and yes, I realize I just ended a sentence with a preposition, which I'm sure you would regard as something up with which you wouldn't put :D:) :

"The more rumors you hear about the candidates for the next Sox manager, the more confused you get. A lot of names have surfaced, but the two who seem to come up the most are Cito Gaston and Ozzie Guillen.

"Up to this point Iíve been on the record as preferring an experienced candidate not named Bobby Valentine over a rookie manager, but if these two are the actual finalists in the race, Iíll have to choose Ozzie over the veteran."

You might say Mr. Vickery made his choice from an extremely limited sample size, no?

If you scan the archives further, you may even find a couple of articles in which Mr. Vickery admitted that he made errors in judgment. For example, you might have noticed that he hasn't used the nickname "Prof. Chaos" for several months.

TornLabrum
11-07-2003, 05:10 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
No, but you kept referring to him in the third person, which was weird...

Something which Mr. Vickery has noted and decided to do himself.

voodoochile
11-07-2003, 05:22 PM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
Something which Mr. Vickery has noted and decided to do himself.

Mr. Chile thinks it is a great idea, Mr. Labrum... :D:

hempsox
11-07-2003, 07:02 PM
Terry Bevington - a manager can not stop talking to the media!
Tony Muser - I lived in KC for the longest time and just like to campaign against this guy when JoPo was singing his praises
Doug Rader

I realize that this was supposed to be only for WS managers but it was never specified.

crector
11-08-2003, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by TornLabrum


I do wish to apologize for the insults. I was very tired and in a pretty bad mood when I replied to your last post, and it's beneath me, at least beneath the way I was brought up to behave.



Thank you and in return I'd like to apologize to Mr. Vickery for likening him to Jay Mariotti aka the Journalistic Version of (take your pick) Joseph Goebbels or Bill Clinton.

In any event, I have a suggestion for Mr. Vickery's next WSI column:

As you know, Ozzie stated at his inaugural press conference that he wants to make the White Sox a "small ball" team with lots of bunting. There are 2 problems with this. (1) The current Sox team is designed as a power hitting outfit complete with several hard-hitting, slow moving guys like Konerko and Thomas. (2) It was reported on the Murph and Fred morning show on WSCR a couple days ago that there was a study that rated Comiskey Park as being the easiest park in the American League to hit Home Runs at.

Question: How can you take a team that's heavily oriented around long ball and change it overnight to small ball without dismantling/rebuilding it and do so while playing 81 games a year at a ball park that's a long ball hitter's paradise and do all this quickly and effectively enough that the Sox wins the Central Division next year?

Brian26
11-08-2003, 11:36 PM
Originally posted by crector
Thank you and in return I'd like to apologize to Mr. Vickery for likening him to Jay Mariotti aka the Journalistic Version of (take your pick) Joseph Goebbels or Bill Clinton.

In any event, I have a suggestion for Mr. Vickery's next WSI column:

As you know, Ozzie stated at his inaugural press conference that he wants to make the White Sox a "small ball" team with lots of bunting. There are 2 problems with this. (1) The current Sox team is designed as a power hitting outfit complete with several hard-hitting, slow moving guys like Konerko and Thomas. (2) It was reported on the Murph and Fred morning show on WSCR a couple days ago that there was a study that rated Comiskey Park as being the easiest park in the American League to hit Home Runs at.

Question: How can you take a team that's heavily oriented around long ball and change it overnight to small ball without dismantling/rebuilding it and do so while playing 81 games a year at a ball park that's a long ball hitter's paradise and do all this quickly and effectively enough that the Sox wins the Central Division next year?

That's a good post. The 2k2 Angles weren't a small ball team. Neither were the 1998-2000 Yankees. AL baseball isn't about small ball. God, this is depressing.

TornLabrum
11-09-2003, 01:06 AM
Originally posted by Brian26
God, this is depressing.

Welcome to the wonderful world of ChiSox fandom! To avoid depression:

:gulp: