PDA

View Full Version : Hawk declares war on the media...


Pages : [1] 2

rdivaldi
02-03-2004, 08:53 PM
I don't listen to WGN radio often but I happened to catch Hawk getting interviewed by Waddle about 30 minutes ago.

During the interview Hawk declared that this year he was going to call out sports writers and sports radio personalities that he thought were lying about the team. He must have spent at least 10 minutes ripping on Kotex Boy, calling him a hack and a fact spinner.

Might make for some interesting TV this season...

RKMeibalane
02-03-2004, 09:01 PM
All I can say is that it's about time someone did this. Sports writers think they can write whatever they want and get away with it. I'm glad that someone is going to call them out if they say something untrue or inappropriate in their column. I expect that the Cubune is going to have a great deal criticism coming its way this season. Way to go, Hawk!

carusochop
02-03-2004, 09:04 PM
How much credibility does hawk really have in the Chicago media world. Seems to me if he opens fire on the Tribue, Sun-Times, Daily Southtown, etc. He'll be the one taht ends up getting blasted.

southsidegirl
02-03-2004, 09:07 PM
Way to go Hawk! I love Hawk. I wish he were my grandpa.

You can put it on the booooard. Yes!http://smilies.sofrayt.com/1/f/offwall.gif

doctor30th
02-03-2004, 09:07 PM
You know I'm glad Hawk said he'd do this. But unfortunately because the White sox Give him a job, most of the Media will probably ignore anything he says. Alot the the Media is High and Mighty about their opinions, I'm sure they contribute to the pessimistic and sometimes negative attitude us sox fans are labeled as having. No offense Phil Rogers. Not directed at you.

MRKARNO
02-03-2004, 09:07 PM
Originally posted by carusochop
How much credibility does hawk really have in the Chicago media world. Seems to me if he opens fire on the Tribue, Sun-Times, Daily Southtown, etc. He'll be the one taht ends up getting blasted.

He gets blasted to some degree anyways. At least someone is sticking up for the team, which is often unfairly criticized

rdivaldi
02-03-2004, 09:08 PM
Hawk has some credibility, after all he has been on the air for quite a long time. I just don't know if this is a very good idea. If anything, it might generate some interest for the casual fan. Sort of a mini soap opera.

Like I said, I'm interested to hear what he's going to say. Will he come out and blast guys, or just timidly disagree. Intriguing to say the least.

ChiWhiteSox1337
02-03-2004, 09:10 PM
Way to go, Hawk. Now hopefully the White Sox will go out and shock the media by winning a championship. This season will be good no matter what happens thanks to Hawk!

duke of dorwood
02-03-2004, 10:22 PM
:hawk

You can put them against the board..........yes

Lip Man 1
02-03-2004, 10:24 PM
"Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone..."

I've got no problem with "Hawk's War," but the first time he glosses over something about the White Sox because his objectivity is muzzled since the Sox pay him, he's going to get hammered.

From former Royals play by play announcer Denny Trease's interview with WSI:

ML: Has the line been blurred even more today? Sox fans like to talk about Hawk Harrelson who used to be known for his honesty as a color commentator when he worked with Don Drysdale, yet today seems to be just a mouthpiece for the organization.

DT: "I think the line has blurred even more. In Hawks case its been a gradual change. I thought he was very good when he worked with Don Drysdale... today some of the things he says just makes you wonder. Hawk is supposedly very close to the owner and it stands to reason that the closer you are to the guy who runs the team, the less you are going to criticize his product."

"Heres an example. When Walt Hriniak was the Sox hitting coach, his style, like the Royals Charlie Lau, was to have everybody hit the exact same way. I know Hawk wouldnt have stood for that when he was playing. To have a coach demand that he change his style, Hawk wouldnt have accepted that. Hawk should have said something about that, especially when the Sox had some guys who were home run hitters like Sammy Sosa and Cory Snyder. Id see these guys who could hit the ball a long way, trying to hit singles up the middle. I was always amused at the influence that Hriniak had on the Sox. Also there was a rumor going around for many years and I heard this from different announcers on different teams, that Hawk actually called pitches from up in the broadcast booth. He had a little switch in the TV booth and hed turn it on or off activating a light in the dugout or the scoreboard that would tip off the hitter. Im not trying to impugn his reputation, Im just saying this is what I was told."

Lip

Randar68
02-03-2004, 10:34 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
"Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone..."

I've got no problem with "Hawk's War," but the first time he glosses over something about the White Sox because his objectivity is muzzled since the Sox pay him, he's going to get hammered.

Lip

ummm, Hawk works for the White Sox, who says he needs to be objective???

Nobody in the media except the people at the Cubune (who profess to be unbiased and not tied by management to kissing the Cubs' butts) cannot say that.

Say what you want Lip, but they are separate cases. Any Sportswriter in this city that blasts Hawk for being biased, when that is what he is paid to do, is only proving their laziness, classlessness, and biases. It cerainly wouldn't be the first time though.

Win1ForMe
02-03-2004, 10:52 PM
I love Hawk and he makes watching the games fun(g). Well, at least while we're winning, because otherwise, I'm getting ready to blow my head off ("HANG WITH 'EM~!").

But, as far as objective opinion, Hawk has absolutely zero credibility. He's the king of blowing smoke up your "you know what." You need to look no further then his recent appearance on North's SCore show where Hawk proclaimed he'd rather have Willie Harris than Alomar because of Willie's "range." GMAB...

Randar68
02-03-2004, 11:10 PM
Originally posted by Win1ForMe
I love Hawk and he makes watching the games fun(g). Well, at least while we're winning, because otherwise, I'm getting ready to blow my head off ("HANG WITH 'EM~!").

But, as far as objective opinion, Hawk has absolutely zero credibility. He's the king of blowing smoke up your "you know what." You need to look no further then his recent appearance on North's SCore show where Hawk proclaimed he'd rather have Willie Harris than Alomar because of Willie's "range." GMAB...

The difference between Hawk and the media is impossible to remove from this arguement. Hawk is paid to be biased, the media is paid to be UNbiased.

The fact that guys like Mariotti and Bayless before were too afraid to step foot in the clubhouse for fear of Frank sticking his fists down their throats is indictment enough. They write with impunity and spend no effort when they sit in some hotel room manufacturing a story based on someone's facial expression they SWORE they could make out from the press box. How can anyone disagree that the shmucks who speculate like it is fact about the ongoings of the Sox clubhouse and players' personalities without ever stepping into the clubhouse should be immune from criticism by ANYONE!???

This does not apply to everyone, but to say Hawk isn't credible in this regard is silly. Apples and Oranges, my friends.

voodoochile
02-04-2004, 12:18 AM
Originally posted by rdivaldi
I don't listen to WGN radio often but I happened to catch Hawk getting interviewed by Waddle about 30 minutes ago.

During the interview Hawk declared that this year he was going to call out sports writers and sports radio personalities that he thought were lying about the team. He must have spent at least 10 minutes ripping on Kotex Boy, calling him a hack and a fact spinner.

Might make for some interesting TV this season...

Oh good the Sox are going to further antagonize the media this year. I realize calling Moronotti a member of the media is stretching the truth, but still...

:hawk
"DJ, I'm hotter than a fly's ass caught in a firework display here at US Cellular field. That Phil Rogers needs to shut his yap. How can the Sox be expected to come from 15 back in mid-July if he keeps ripping on them for dogging it. I tell you it's just got me riled."

:DJ
"Well, his point about the way they are shopping Maggs resembling a carnival barker at Southbys was pretty dead on, I thought."

:hawk
"Now don't you start, Feisty. Why just the other day JR himself informed me that Maggs will end his HOF career on the Southside and nothing will stop that from happening. Frank takes ball 4 to lead off the second inning and out of the dugout comes Aaron Rowand pinch hitting for Magglio. I hope Maggs is okay. He did mention that he wasn't feeling very well."

:DJ
"Um... yeah... that's it... He's got the blue flu as in Dodger Blue. It just came over the wire the Sox traded Maggs for 3 minor league pitchers and a 27 YO AAA RF. The Dodgers also threw in some cash and will pay the rest of Magglio's contract. In other words..."

:hawk
"He gawn... and Aaron swings wildly at a slider in the dirt. That will bring up Paul Konerko. Paul is hitting .230 with 15 dingers so far this year. I have to say, that JR is absolutely right. Paulie is the kind of guy you want on your baseball team..."

Cubsfan
02-04-2004, 01:21 AM
There is no such thing as an unbiased media.

wdelaney72
02-04-2004, 07:55 AM
Consider the source. I'm as much of a Hawk fan as anybody, but let's be real - he's a goof himself (granted, a likeable goof.)

If he fires on the sports-writers, it will entertaining, and I'll look forward to it. But no one is really going to care what he has to say. It will just be wasted breath.

Here's a concept - win. That's one way to avoid criticism by the local wrters.

habibharu
02-04-2004, 08:07 AM
this was unbelievable. he blasts mariotti saying that he has only seen jay once at a sox game so he doesnt know baseball. he also said that he plagarizes off other sports writers. he also blasts boers and bernstein. he gives props to greenstein,gregor,padilla,MJH,julie sweica, and north and buffone

SEALgep
02-04-2004, 08:31 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
"Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone..."

I've got no problem with "Hawk's War," but the first time he glosses over something about the White Sox because his objectivity is muzzled since the Sox pay him, he's going to get hammered.

From former Royals play by play announcer Denny Trease's interview with WSI:

ML: Has the line been blurred even more today? Sox fans like to talk about Hawk Harrelson who used to be known for his honesty as a color commentator when he worked with Don Drysdale, yet today seems to be just a mouthpiece for the organization.

DT: "I think the line has blurred even more. In Hawks case its been a gradual change. I thought he was very good when he worked with Don Drysdale... today some of the things he says just makes you wonder. Hawk is supposedly very close to the owner and it stands to reason that the closer you are to the guy who runs the team, the less you are going to criticize his product."



Lip

What I don't get is why does Hawk getting paid by the Sox necessarily mean these aren't his true feelings. That's bs. He says whats on his mind. When Manuel wasn't doing well, and started Cotts over Buehrle in Yankee Stadium, Hawk was pissed. He let it be known, he criticized. So why is it when he likes the team now he's a puppet for the Sox. It's crap. It's inaccurate. It's Marriotti being a baby for Hawk making him feel bad at Sox Fest.

34 Inch Stick
02-04-2004, 09:03 AM
It all seems like a planned attack by the White Sox organization. He is saying things that JR and KW would get ripped into if the words came from their mouths. Since Hawk straddles the line of employee and reporter, he has more free reign. It appears it is an organizational strategy because Hawk has been on every station that talks sports repeating the same lines since this weekend.

I heard him on the SCORE as well. If I were Hawk I would not continue with the Harris is better than Alomar statment. It sounds silly. I agree Harris deserves some chance to prove himself, but leadoff hitter on a team hoping to make the playoffs is not the right situation. This has a better chance of ruining him than helping him.

jeremyb1
02-04-2004, 09:05 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
"Also there was a rumor going around for many years and I heard this from different announcers on different teams, that Hawk actually called pitches from up in the broadcast booth. He had a little switch in the TV booth and hed turn it on or off activating a light in the dugout or the scoreboard that would tip off the hitter. Im not trying to impugn his reputation, Im just saying this is what I was told."

These rumors about tipping off pitches with the scoreboard seem insane to me. Its just really hard for me to believe teams could get away with it in this day and age. It shouldn't be easy to subtly tip of pitches on the scoreboard which is in plain view.

SEALgep
02-04-2004, 09:08 AM
Originally posted by 34 Inch Stick
It all seems like a planned attack by the White Sox organization. He is saying things that JR and KW would get ripped into if the words came from their mouths. Since Hawk straddles the line of employee and reporter, he has more free reign. It appears it is an organizational strategy because Hawk has been on every station that talks sports repeating the same lines since this weekend.

I heard him on the SCORE as well. If I were Hawk I would not continue with the Harris is better than Alomar statment. It sounds silly. I agree Harris deserves some chance to prove himself, but leadoff hitter on a team hoping to make the playoffs is not the right situation. This has a better chance of ruining him than helping him.

He was comparing Alomars range compared to Harris. Alomar has lost a step from the years, and Harris is very fast in the prime of his youth. Hawk is right. Besides, he also said that Manuel, without saying Manuel, made Harris bunt all the time. He wasn't used to having his approach at the plate in that style. He hit .409 in AAA, let him bat the way he always has, then make a determination as far as offense.

SEALgep
02-04-2004, 09:11 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
These rumors about tipping off pitches with the scoreboard seem insane to me. Its just really hard for me to believe teams could get away with it in this day and age. It shouldn't be easy to subtly tip of pitches on the scoreboard which is in plain view.
Not only that, but the timing wouldn't fit. When a pitcher is in his wind up, the batter isn't looking at the scoreboard.

Palehose13
02-04-2004, 09:15 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
He was comparing Alomars range compared to Harris. Alomar has lost a step from the years, and Harris is very fast in the prime of his youth. Hawk is right. Besides, he also said that Manuel, without saying Manuel, made Harris bunt all the time. He wasn't used to having his approach at the plate in that style. He hit .409 in AAA, let him bat the way he always has, then make a determination as far as offense.
Thank you for clarifying what he said. From what I remember him saying Friday night at the seminar, Hawk is simply going to give the OTHER SIDE of the story. For example, the media and everyone was pissed that Alomar signed for less than what we offered him. Everyone was blaming and criticizing the Sox. No one in the organization responded until this weekend saying that Alomar's agent is the one who screwed up the deal.

I know that the White Sox organization isn't the best in the world, but I don't think that it is the Axis of Evil that many portray it to be. For years they have been PC and keeping their yap shut and not defending themselves against the media in this city. Hell, WE ALL KNOW that the media gives the Sox a raw deal. I am ECSTATIC that hawk is finally going to step to the plate and answer/give the other side of issues when the media blasts the Sox.

Brian26
02-04-2004, 09:18 AM
Originally posted by wdelaney72
Consider the source. I'm as much of a Hawk fan as anybody, but let's be real - he's a goof himself (granted, a likeable goof.)

Let's be real. Ken Harrelson is anything but a goof. He has an incredible knowledge of the game of baseball and knows it backwards and forwards. Getting past the obvious jokes about Fisk playing leftfield or trading Bobby Bonilla, I'd say I've enjoyed Harrelson in the booth for the past 20 years (except for his NY exile) because he's a teacher. There are guys that are generic baseball announcers that call the pitches and rattle off some generic stats, and then there are guys that can bring the game to life. Hawk is one of those guys. I respect the hell out of him.

poorme
02-04-2004, 09:20 AM
This is all masterminded by JR. What a joke. The gutless loser of an owner can't put a winner on the field, so the next best thing is to blame the media.

Frater Perdurabo
02-04-2004, 09:43 AM
Originally posted by Cubsfan
There is no such thing as an unbiased media.

So simple. So succinct. So true.

KingXerxes
02-04-2004, 10:40 AM
What in hell is wrong with this organization?

First off - I have always said that the primary reason Ken Harrelson is employed by Reinsdorf is because he acts as JR's eyes and ears in the media, and is a snakish tattletale. I was taken to the woodshed by many on this board, but this now ices it. The hilarious thing about all this is that they honestly think that this will somehow help the cause of the White Sox in the long run.....I guarantee you that it won't. They continue to trivialize themselves and make themselves look worse and worse every time somebody opens their yap - it's almost like they're planning some sort of chaotic look. Ken Harrelson is going to take on members of the media - that is classic. I'm sure that the editorial boards of the Tribune/Sun Times/Daily Herald/Daily Southtown/Suburban Life/The Shopper/The Onion/The Daily News/The Today/The American are all sitting up and taking notice that a big heavyweight like Ken Harrelson is "gonna come down on them like a ton of bricks"..........a chill surely has run through their collective spines.

If they want to straighten out this mess of an organization, and if they want to regain their stature on an equal footing with the Cubs - start by canning this mope, and then quit trying to use your announcer as a defacto organizational and baseball expert. It's laughable.

:hawk

"Hmmmmmmmmmmm.....................DJ I want you to put this KingXerxes character on the top of my Enemies List - I'm dadgummed plum mad at him.............yessir............Ol' KingXerxes........Mercy."

:DJ

"Shut up."

rdivaldi
02-04-2004, 10:49 AM
I fully disagree with anyone who believes that getting rid of Hawk from the the TV booth is an option. Granted I don't think that his going after the media is such a great idea.

However, let's take a look what Hawk is quickly becoming, and that is a mouthpiece for the organization. Look how often you hear people quoting "Hawkisms". Does this sound like a familiar strategy?

Here's a hint, a team back in the 80's started exploiting a drunk old announcer to be the mouthpiece for its organization in it's efforts promote its awful team and its run down ballpark. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.....

voodoochile
02-04-2004, 10:51 AM
Originally posted by rdivaldi
I fully disagree with anyone who believes that getting rid of Hawk from the the TV booth is an option. Granted I don't think that his going after the media is such a great idea.

However, let's take a look what Hawk is quickly becoming, and that is a mouthpiece for the organization. Look how often you hear people quoting "Hawkisms". Does this sound like a familiar strategy?

Here's a hint, a team back in the 80's started exploiting a drunk old announcer to be the mouthpiece for its organization in it's efforts promote its awful team and its run down ballpark. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.....

That "drunk old announcer" was one of the top baseball PBP men in the history of the game. He won awards from Sporting News as far back as the 40's for sportscaster of the year. He called it like it is.

Say what you want about Harry, when he was in his prime, he would call a spade a spade. If your team sucked, he wasn't afraid to say it.

rdivaldi
02-04-2004, 10:56 AM
That "drunk old announcer" was one of the top baseball PBP men in the history of the game. He won awards from Sporting News as far back as the 40's for sportscaster of the year. He called it like it is.

Say what you want about Harry, when he was in his prime, he would call a spade a spade. If your team sucked, he wasn't afraid to say it.

And he'd be sure to call a Japanese player "slanty eyed".

But I digress. Hawk is quickly becoming a centerpiece for the organization, his sayings and mannerisms are entering the mainstream. While he might not ever have the pull of that drunk old announcer, his presence is starting to generate interest.

KingXerxes
02-04-2004, 11:06 AM
Originally posted by rdivaldi
I fully disagree with anyone who believes that getting rid of Hawk from the the TV booth is an option. Granted I don't think that his going after the media is such a great idea.

However, let's take a look what Hawk is quickly becoming, and that is a mouthpiece for the organization. Look how often you hear people quoting "Hawkisms". Does this sound like a familiar strategy?

Here's a hint, a team back in the 80's started exploiting a drunk old announcer to be the mouthpiece for its organization in it's efforts promote its awful team and its run down ballpark. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.....

I have just a couple of problems with the above.

1. Ken Harrelson is not "quickly becoming" a mouthpiece for the organization - he has BEEN the mouthpiece for this organization for years.

2. When the Cubs hired Harry Caray - they did so with the intent that he would announce games. Not show up at Cub functions sitting next to Dallas Green and talk about the contract situations of players.

3. A lot of posters on this board are bemoaning the fact that the White Sox have become "the other baseball team" in Chicago. Well guess who's been the #1 media guy through-out this slide into oblivion. That's right it's been the incredibly popular Ken Harrelson .

Don't confuse having a contrived call sign being picked up on ESPN's highlights as being the same as being "popular". It amazes me how this guy seems to escape any criticsm whatsoever of the White Sox's slide in popularity. He's insufferable to an average fan.

SEALgep
02-04-2004, 11:06 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile
That "drunk old announcer" was one of the top baseball PBP men in the history of the game. He won awards from Sporting News as far back as the 40's for sportscaster of the year. He called it like it is.

Say what you want about Harry, when he was in his prime, he would call a spade a spade. If your team sucked, he wasn't afraid to say it.

Where were you guys last year when Hawk had plenty to say about the personnel of our team. He was upset with Jimenez when he sucked, and he complained about Manuel. Now when we fixed some of our major problems, and he says he likes the team, all of a sudden he is a JR puppet. I don't buy it. I think you guys don't like him for whatever reason, and are just using this incident to bash him. He doesn't deserve it.

KingXerxes
02-04-2004, 11:10 AM
Originally posted by rdivaldi
But I digress. Hawk is quickly becoming a centerpiece for the organization, his sayings and mannerisms are entering the mainstream. While he might not ever have the pull of that drunk old announcer, his presence is starting to generate interest.

rdivaldi - I don't know how old you are, but I am assuming that you don't remember the mid 1980's, when your buddy Harrelson WAS the centerpiece of the organization (GM, his cartoonish and buffoonish picture on the schedule et al ad naseum). We've been there, we've done that. You make it sound like he's been doing White Sox games for the past two years - it's been twenty.

voodoochile
02-04-2004, 11:11 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Where were you guys last year when Hawk had plenty to say about the personnel of our team. He was upset with Jimenez when he sucked, and he complained about Manuel. Now when we fixed some of our major problems, and he says he likes the team, all of a sudden he is a JR puppet. I don't buy it. I think you guys don't like him for whatever reason, and are just using this incident to bash him. He doesn't deserve it.

Maybe it is the way he is hyping Harris, Rowand and every other "can't miss" prospect.

I'm not as big a Hawk basher as some of the folks around, but he does nothing for me either. I do agree that he is JR's boy and acts as JR's eyes and ears to some extent while sticking up for JR publicly. Yes, I realize that is just good business sense (don't bad mouth your boss), but when the fans are starting to realize the ownership group is in it for the $$$ and Hawk keeps touting the company line, it leads to some well deserved criticism.

What can possibly be gained by taking on the media in Chicago? More angry columns? More bad publicity?

Maybe it is a good thing. The sooner they finish killing this franchise the sooner they will have to sell... :angry:

SEALgep
02-04-2004, 11:12 AM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
I have just a couple of problems with the above.

1. Ken Harrelson is not "quickly becoming" a mouthpiece for the organization - he has BEEN the mouthpiece for this organization for years.

2. When the Cubs hired Harry Caray - they did so with the intent that he would announce games. Not show up at Cub functions sitting next to Dallas Green and talk about the contract situations of players.

3. A lot of posters on this board are bemoaning the fact that the White Sox have become "the other baseball team" in Chicago. Well guess who's been the #1 media guy through-out this slide into oblivion. That's right it's been the incredibly popular Ken Harrelson .

Don't confuse having a contrived call sign being picked up on ESPN's highlights as being the same as being "popular". It amazes me how this guy seems to escape any criticsm whatsoever of the White Sox's slide in popularity. He's insufferable to an average fan.

Don't speak for the average fan, only for yourself. Plenty here like Hawk. And if you think Harry never got involved when discussing issues regarding the team, you're nuts. Hawk happens to be passionate for the Sox, and you put him down for it. Are you a Sox fan? Anyway, Hawk needed to show emotion for how the media has been nonstop bashing the Sox, needlessly. If the Sox do something they're stupid, and if the Cubs do it it's a good move. It's the media doing this, and it's biased and stupid. You don't have to agree, but it doesn't make it inaccurate.

KingXerxes
02-04-2004, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Where were you guys last year when Hawk had plenty to say about the personnel of our team. He was upset with Jimenez when he sucked, and he complained about Manuel. Now when we fixed some of our major problems, and he says he likes the team, all of a sudden he is a JR puppet. I don't buy it. I think you guys don't like him for whatever reason, and are just using this incident to bash him. He doesn't deserve it.

Hold on a second - just hold on. Harrelson complained about Jimenez after he was gone. He complained about Manuel after he was gone. When those guys were still around he used his stupid little "pregnant pauses" so that a listener could take it to mean whatever they wanted it to mean. In no way is he the "outspoken critic" that you're trying to paint him as - in no way.

SEALgep
02-04-2004, 11:16 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Maybe it is the way he is hyping Harris, Rowand and every other "can't miss" prospect.

I'm not as big a Hawk basher as some of the folks around, but he does nothing for me either. I do agree that he is JR's boy and acts as JR's eyes and ears to some extent while sticking up for JR publicly. Yes, I realize that is just good business sense (don't bad mouth your boss), but when the fans are starting to realize the ownership group is in it for the $$$ and Hawk keeps touting the company line, it leads to some well deserved criticism.

What can possibly be gained by taking on the media in Chicago? More angry columns? More bad publicity?

Maybe it is a good thing. The sooner they finish killing this franchise the sooner they will have to sell... :angry:

There is nothing wrong with Rowand or Harris. And if his ideas and phiosophy coincides with JR, that doesn't mean he tells him to say it. Why can't he really believe what he says, why does it have to be assumed that he has some seperate motive. And for only making things worse with the media, that's not true. Some guys support the Sox and most don't. His comments won't sway their opinions.

rdivaldi
02-04-2004, 11:17 AM
1. Ken Harrelson is not "quickly becoming" a mouthpiece for the organization - he has BEEN the mouthpiece for this organization for years.

I don't agree with that. The team has never promoted it's announcers, it's always tried to concentrate on the players and the managers. I think there is a new, concerted effort by the team to promote Hawk.

2. When the Cubs hired Harry Caray - they did so with the intent that he would announce games. Not show up at Cub functions sitting next to Dallas Green and talk about the contract situations of players.

And show up at every PR event, and make tons of commericals promoting the team. I don't buy your statement.

3. A lot of posters on this board are bemoaning the fact that the White Sox have become "the other baseball team" in Chicago. Well guess who's been the #1 media guy through-out this slide into oblivion. That's right it's been the incredibly popular Ken Harrelson .

I think that has a lot more to do with the very, very bad deicisions made by the organization over the past 20 years, not Hawk. You can only play with the cards you're dealt.

Don't confuse having a contrived call sign being picked up on ESPN's highlights as being the same as being "popular". It amazes me how this guy seems to escape any criticsm whatsoever of the White Sox's slide in popularity. He's insufferable to an average fan.

But it's exposure. The more you see and hear Hawk, the more you'll associate him and the team. Whether or not you like him and his catch phrases, it's still in the mainstream consciousness. And I don't agree with your assessment of his being "insufferable". He has a good following and it's likely to grow.

KingXerxes
02-04-2004, 11:17 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Hawk happens to be passionate for the Sox, and you put him down for it. Are you a Sox fan?

SEALgep - I will try to put this in as gentlemanly a manner as possible, and I certainly do apologize if you take offense. Ken Harrelson is paid a pretty good buck to be a shill for the White Sox. I myself pay money to watch the White Sox. And yet you have somehow - in your infinite wisdom - determined that Harrelson is a "big fan" and I'm not. You'll do really well in life.

SEALgep
02-04-2004, 11:18 AM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Hold on a second - just hold on. Harrelson complained about Jimenez after he was gone. He complained about Manuel after he was gone. When those guys were still around he used his stupid little "pregnant pauses" so that a listener could take it to mean whatever they wanted it to mean. In no way is he the "outspoken critic" that you're trying to paint him as - in no way.

You're wrong. Especially with Manuel. He made it clear his disapproval of the Cotts over Buehrle move. He was angry, he made it be known, before the game and after.

skottyj242
02-04-2004, 11:19 AM
This has nothing to do with anything but at least the Hawk isn't screwing J.R.'s wife like Harry was in St. Louis.

rdivaldi
02-04-2004, 11:21 AM
rdivaldi - I don't know how old you are, but I am assuming that you don't remember the mid 1980's, when your buddy Harrelson WAS the centerpiece of the organization (GM, his cartoonish and buffoonish picture on the schedule et al ad naseum). We've been there, we've done that. You make it sound like he's been doing White Sox games for the past two years - it's been twenty.

I remember his miserable job as GM, that was a disaster. But you know what, I really couldn't watch the Sox in those days because we didn't have cable. I was stuck with the Flubbies on WGN.

Again, while Hawk has been around for a long time, the organization has not tried to use him as a marketing tool. I think that this is representing a change in strategy...

KingXerxes
02-04-2004, 11:22 AM
Originally posted by rdivaldi
He has a good following and it's likely to grow.

Is it your contention that there is some sort of twenty year delay regarding this guy's popularity?

Look you can like they guy (as you do) or hate him (as I do), please quit making statements like the above, when there is a twenty year pattern saying that you're wrong. Please explain to me now in 2004 the situation is right for his popularity to increase when it hasn't happened since around 1983?

Also doesn't it worry you - even a little bit - when a baseball team focuses on it's announcer?

SEALgep
02-04-2004, 11:25 AM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
SEALgep - I will try to put this in as gentlemanly a manner as possible, and I certainly do apologize if you take offense. Ken Harrelson is paid a pretty good buck to be a shill for the White Sox. I myself pay money to watch the White Sox. And yet you have somehow - in your infinite wisdom - determined that Harrelson is a "big fan" and I'm not. You'll do really well in life.

Did you just call me stupid, and that I'm a failure. Listen here, you may pay money to watch the Sox but so do all of us, that doesn't make your opinions any more valid than mine or anyone else. I'm not the one complaining about every single move made. I never hear you say anything positive about the team. Complaining doesn't make you more of a fan, or more intelligent. You just sound bitter. And just because Hawk gets paid for his job doesn't make him not a fan. He loves what he does, and he loves the Sox, and you're butchering him for it. You need to grow up a little. Insult my intelligence because you can't take a difference in opinion, good luck in life yourself.

CubKilla
02-04-2004, 11:28 AM
Hawk should declare war on those that allowed the media to become the monster it has become when discussing Chicago baseball..... Jerry Reinsdorf and, after Einhorn's interview in the DS, him too.

Hawk shouldn't misplace the blame.

KingXerxes
02-04-2004, 11:29 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Did you just call me stupid, and that I'm a failure. Listen here, you may pay money to watch the Sox but so do all of us, that doesn't make your opinions any more valid than mine or anyone else. I'm not the one complaining about every single move made. I never hear you say anything positive about the team. Complaining doesn't make you more of a fan, or more intelligent. You just sound bitter. And just because Hawk gets paid for his job doesn't make him not a fan. He loves what he does, and he loves the Sox, and you're butchering him for it. You need to grow up a little. Insult my intelligence because you can't take a difference in opinion, good luck in life yourself.

Ah but I can accept a difference of opinion. I fully realize that Ken Harrelson has a very loyal following of fans, but I contend that his his following does not envelope what one might call the "average fan". IMO he is a huge self-promoter, and serves to the overall detriment of the White Sox organization. Never - anywhere in any of my posts about Ken Harrelson did I ever question the baseball alligience of anybody who countered my opinion. You did that.

rdivaldi
02-04-2004, 11:30 AM
Is it your contention that there is some sort of twenty year delay regarding this guy's popularity?

No, it's my contention that the organization is working to use Hawk in a more visible manner. It has become quite obvious to me over the past year or two that Hawk has entered the mainstream media quite a bit more than in the past. "He Gone" is getting used more and more.

Look you can like they guy (as you do) or hate him (as I do), please quit making statements like the above, when there is a twenty year pattern saying that you're wrong. Please explain to me now in 2004 the situation is right for his popularity to increase when it hasn't happened since around 1983?

Liking him or not is irrelevant. Again, the organization is making a shift in it's philosophy. Someone in the PR department seems to have seen an opportunity to put the guy in a more visible position. Whether or not you want to admit it, it is very possible for someone's popularity to hit a spike after 20 years. Heard of John Kerry?

Also doesn't it worry you - even a little bit - when a baseball team focuses on it's announcer?

It worked for the Flubbies...

SSN721
02-04-2004, 11:33 AM
I just wanted to throw in my two cents here. Kinda surprised on how heated this debate has become, I for one find Hawk to be a very good announcer and associate his voice, phrases, mannerisms and attitude with White Sox baseball. I find that during his broadcasts he often will announce in the same tone or mood that I am feeling watching the team whether they are succeeding or failing. I feel that he does an excellent job and don't understand how it can be said he doesn't criticize players or the organization because in almost all of his broadcasts he has constructive criticism. I don't know maybe it sounds all sappy I just find that he is the voice of the White Sox (TV of course, John Rooney and Ed Farmer are fantastic on radio) and find him entertaining, insightful and endearing. I will be quite entertained when he does take his stance on the media and am looking forward to it.

SEALgep
02-04-2004, 11:36 AM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Ah but I can accept a difference of opinion. I fully realize that Ken Harrelson has a very loyal following of fans, but I contend that his his following does not envelope what one might call the "average fan". IMO he is a huge self-promoter, and serves to the overall detriment of the White Sox organization. Never - anywhere in any of my posts about Ken Harrelson did I ever question the baseball alligience of anybody who countered my opinion. You did that.

What is your definition of an "average fan." No, I didn't say because you dislike Hawk that your allegiance was in question. I said because you have never said anything positive about the White Sox. I'm curious as to see what you believe the White Sox have going for them. What is something positive you can think of?

SEALgep
02-04-2004, 11:38 AM
Originally posted by SSN721
I just wanted to throw in my two cents here. Kinda surprised on how heated this debate has become, I for one find Hawk to be a very good announcer and associate his voice, phrases, mannerisms and attitude with White Sox baseball. I find that during his broadcasts he often will announce in the same tone or mood that I am feeling watching the team whether they are succeeding or failing. I feel that he does an excellent job and don't understand how it can be said he doesn't criticize players or the organization because in almost all of his broadcasts he has constructive criticism. I don't know maybe it sounds all sappy I just find that he is the voice of the White Sox (TV of course, John Rooney and Ed Farmer are fantastic on radio) and find him entertaining, insightful and endearing. I will be quite entertained when he does take his stance on the media and am looking forward to it.

From an average fan. You are very right SSN721, he does criticize, but it is constructive. I enjoy his knowledge of the game, and his passion for the Sox.

ewokpelts
02-04-2004, 11:40 AM
Originally posted by rdivaldi
I don't listen to WGN radio often but I happened to catch Hawk getting interviewed by Waddle about 30 minutes ago.

During the interview Hawk declared that this year he was going to call out sports writers and sports radio personalities that he thought were lying about the team. He must have spent at least 10 minutes ripping on Kotex Boy, calling him a hack and a fact spinner.

Might make for some interesting TV this season...

Kotex Boy? I prefer he just concentrated on Moronotti.
Gene

Brian26
02-04-2004, 11:44 AM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Ah but I can accept a difference of opinion. I fully realize that Ken Harrelson has a very loyal following of fans, but I contend that his his following does not envelope what one might call the "average fan". IMO he is a huge self-promoter, and serves to the overall detriment of the White Sox organization.

This argument is asinine.

King- Do you suggest we go out and sign one of the great generic announcers like Gary Thorne to take over the broadcast duties? How about Gumbel? Joe Buck? The list of generic national announcers goes on and on and on. None of them know the game. None of them have any allegiance to Chicago. None of them care about the Sox. To bring any of these guys in would be a disaster. The Sox tried Jim Durham in 1990 and Gary Thorne in '89. They sucked.

King, who do you think should replace Hawk as the mouthpiece of the franchise in the tv booth? Curious as to who you think could do a better job.

KingXerxes
02-04-2004, 12:00 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
What is your definition of an "average fan." No, I didn't say because you dislike Hawk that your allegiance was in question. I said because you have never said anything positive about the White Sox. I'm curious as to see what you believe the White Sox have going for them. What is something positive you can think of?

"Average fan" does NOT include anybody on this website. People who post here are several degrees beyond average. What I would consider an average fan to be is somebody who views baseball as just another form of entertainment - The reason Harrelson does not appeal to these fans is due to the fact that he is constantly talking about how so and so kept his shoulders in etc. While these observations may or may not appeal to your average major league hitting instructor - they do not make the game any more watchable to my wife.

As far as having anything positive to say about the White Sox, while I am certainly critical of certain of their media representatives, I am probably one of the more optimistic posters on these threads - WHEN IT COMES TO THE ACTUAL BASEBALL ITSELF. I don't know if I can go back and pull up optimistic postings - many of which I was unfortunately wrong about - but you should take some time and go through them before you start issuing blanket statements such as "you have never said anything positive about the White Sox". Again - A lesser person would take offense - I won't.

As far as what I think the positives of the White Sox are? I'm the one who's saying that I think they'll be in the thick of this race all year - and keep in mind - I'm happy if they win the division even if they don't go all the way.

If your idea of a fan is some sort of blind whooping and yelling, and standing to the defense of the organization no matter what stupid move they make - well I certainly don't fit under that description.

KingXerxes
02-04-2004, 12:01 PM
Originally posted by Brian26
King, who do you think should replace Hawk as the mouthpiece of the franchise in the tv booth? Curious as to who you think could do a better job.

Rooney.

maurice
02-04-2004, 12:01 PM
There's no question that Hawk is JR's shill. While his shtick is annoying to me, I'm not convinced that it's bad for the organization.

Originally posted by southsidegirl
I wish he were my grandpa.

I won't comment on your sentiment, SSG, but this is a very impressive use of the subjunctive. Lots of professional writers and editors many times older than you regularly get this wrong.

Hullett_Fan
02-04-2004, 12:02 PM
Originally posted by Brian26
This argument is asinine.

King- Do you suggest we go out and sign one of the great generic announcers like ...Gumbel?


Greg and Bryant Gumbel grew up in Chicago. Greg started in sportscasting on Channel 5 News. One of them was a Sox fan and one was a Cubs fan (can't remember which).

Greg is a great broadcaster and did a good job on the Super Bowl (Phil Simms on the otherhand...).

harwar
02-04-2004, 12:05 PM
I think "Hawk"is very well liked by the baseball world but theres' not an overwhelming amount of respect there,mainly because of his dress and demeanor during his playing years.
I doubt if anyone really cares what "Hawk" says.
Now John Rooney is a different story entirely.He is extremely well respected in the baseball world and people would pay attention if he would come out and blast the Chicago media for having their collective heads up their ass.
Anyway you look at it,this organization is sinking fast and i wouldn't be surprised if the park was empty most of the year.
Ahh .. what the hell .. we're probably going to be battling the tigers & indians for 4th or 5th place anyway.

Brian26
02-04-2004, 12:09 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Rooney.

The one guy I like better than Hawk.

I agree.

When Hawk does retire, I fully expect Roon to take over the ship. His stint with DJ in Oakland at the end of 2002 was excellent.

KingXerxes
02-04-2004, 12:12 PM
Originally posted by harwar
Ahh .. what the hell .. we're probably going to be battling the tigers & indians for 4th or 5th place anyway.

I suspect Minnesota will be duking it out with Detroit on the bottom, we'll be slugging it out with Kansas City ( and possibly Cleveland) on the top end.

POSITIVE COMMENT COUNT ON THE KING XERXES POSITIVECOMMENT-OTRON [1].

Dan H
02-04-2004, 12:17 PM
It appears to me that Harrelson is saying things that Jerry Reinsdorf feels he himself can't say publicly. The strategy is probably is to get organization critics on the defensive and get them off the team's back. Not a bad strategy, since it kind of worked for Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew. But then again, look what happend to them.

KingXerxes
02-04-2004, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by Dan H
It appears to me that Harrelson is saying things that Jerry Reinsdorf feels he himself can't say publicly. The strategy is probably is to get organization critics on the defensive and get them off the team's back. Not a bad strategy, since it kind of worked for Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew. But then again, look what happend to them.

I have never seen "taking the media on" work for anybody - ever.

POSITIVECOMMENT-OTRON COUNT [1]
NEUTRALCOMMENT-OTRON COUNT [1].

Lip Man 1
02-04-2004, 12:21 PM
Greg Gumble went to De La Salle high school (he may have been there with Rich King) and grew up a big Sox fan according to a story on the Gumble brothers a few years ago in Sports Illustrated.

Bryant on the other hand became a Cub fan.

Lip

Brian26
02-04-2004, 12:28 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Greg Gumble went to De La Salle high school (he may have been there with Rich King) and grew up a big Sox fan according to a story on the Gumble brothers a few years ago in Sports Illustrated.

And he still wouldn't put one more ass in a seat at the Cell if he took over for Hawk.

Lip Man 1
02-04-2004, 12:33 PM
Brian:

I was simply answering the question earlier in the thread that was asked about which Gumble brother was a Sox fan.

He'd never take the Sox job even if asked because the Sox wouldn't pay him enough and he'd want the ability to say what needs to be said without worrying if he was going to be fired over it.

Chill...

Lip

34 Inch Stick
02-04-2004, 12:43 PM
Seal, referring to your response to me a few pages back, Hawk absolutely did say that he would take Harris over Alomar right now. The reason he brought up range was because Mike North almost fell off his chair when Hawk made the statment.

Harris may have ability, but you have to put most rookies (or almost rookies) in a position to succeed. You start a closer prospect as a setup man. You put a starter in the bullpen or end of the rotation. You platoon a fielder or put him at the bottom of the lineup with a veteran as a backup. Letting him start opposite a questionable defensive shortstop and hit leadoff is a recipe for disaster.

I like Hawk. Anytime the announcer is the focal point of a PR campaign you are hiding an inability of your team (as we witnessed for several years up north).

One other thing that has become plainly obvious is that this is not just an assault on the media, it is an assault on Jerry Manuel. Hawk blamed EVERYTHING that went wrong with the season on Manuel.

Brian26
02-04-2004, 01:03 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
He'd never take the Sox job even if asked because the Sox wouldn't pay him enough and he'd want the ability to say what needs to be said without worrying if he was going to be fired over it.

Are you joking me? One of the most vanilla guys in sports broadcasting is going to start stirring the pot? Give me a break. And I'd love to see him walking around the hotel lobby late at night after "what needs to be said" is said about, for example, a Jimenez or Daubach. That would be fun to watch.

Brian26
02-04-2004, 01:05 PM
Originally posted by 34 Inch Stick
Hawk blamed EVERYTHING that went wrong with the season on Manuel.

Not true.

The baserunning blunders were blamed on the baserunners and NOBODY else. This came up on the telecasts several times this year. At some point, it's not the fault of the coach if the runners aren't doing their job. Hawk even said at Soxfest that the Daubach/Jiminez baserunning blunder in Arizona was the worst he's ever seen.

skottyj242
02-04-2004, 01:54 PM
Last years team was probably the worst baserunning team in the history of baseball, this year there's no more Bruce Kimm.

voodoochile
02-04-2004, 02:06 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
There is nothing wrong with Rowand or Harris. And if his ideas and phiosophy coincides with JR, that doesn't mean he tells him to say it. Why can't he really believe what he says, why does it have to be assumed that he has some seperate motive. And for only making things worse with the media, that's not true. Some guys support the Sox and most don't. His comments won't sway their opinions.

Nothing wrong with them that sitting on the bench couldn't solve anyway...

SEALgep
02-04-2004, 02:22 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Nothing wrong with them that sitting on the bench couldn't solve anyway...

They'll be better than you give credit for, remember what you say now.

voodoochile
02-04-2004, 02:25 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
They'll be better than you give credit for, remember what you say now.

Hey, I am the first to say that I hope they prove me wrong. I like it when Sox players perform well, but Hawk tends to exagerate about the Sox prospects, so if you are looking to him for evidence of future potential, then you are hearing what the company wants you to.

Makes you wonder exactly why he has hyped so many "can't miss" busts through the years. Maybe it is so Sox fans won't get so upset when the proven veterans leave via FA.

:fans
"Hawk said Willie Harris is the next coming of Kenny Lofton! WOOHOO! The leadoff slot is solved for the next decade..."

I like to see just a little more evidence myself...

SEALgep
02-04-2004, 02:31 PM
Originally posted by 34 Inch Stick
Seal, referring to your response to me a few pages back, Hawk absolutely did say that he would take Harris over Alomar right now. The reason he brought up range was because Mike North almost fell off his chair when Hawk made the statment.

Harris may have ability, but you have to put most rookies (or almost rookies) in a position to succeed. You start a closer prospect as a setup man. You put a starter in the bullpen or end of the rotation. You platoon a fielder or put him at the bottom of the lineup with a veteran as a backup. Letting him start opposite a questionable defensive shortstop and hit leadoff is a recipe for disaster.

I like Hawk. Anytime the announcer is the focal point of a PR campaign you are hiding an inability of your team (as we witnessed for several years up north).

One other thing that has become plainly obvious is that this is not just an assault on the media, it is an assault on Jerry Manuel. Hawk blamed EVERYTHING that went wrong with the season on Manuel.

That's not why he brought up range. Come on now. That was obviously his main point, but also he hit .409 in the minors, and when brought up, Manuel changed his approach at the plate and had him bunt all the time. That's not why he .409 in the minors and Hawk made that point even throughout the season.

As far as bringing him up slowly, because that's how you work guys into the majors isn't true. If they're good enough to start, you start them. That's the case with all teams and a majority of their rookies. Desi Relaford wasn't a utility man. Anyway, Harris has some major league games, so that point doesn't work anyway.

Since when is Hawk the PR focal point. The media is making him, if you believe he is indeed the focal point. Hawk says whats on his mind, much like Guillen. If we're all talking about it, and the media is talking about it, does that mean that was Hawk's and JR master plan to avoid talking about the team. Man some of you have some wild conspiracy theories. You can see when Hawk talks about the Sox, that he has conviction in his words. You can't buy that.

He didn't blame everything, but Manuel sets the tone in the club house, and it wasn't good all season. Guys had long faces. Guillen isn't going to let that happen, so why is Hawk's excitement of that have any bearing of his role for the Sox. I'm excited about that, JR didn't have to pay me a dime.

SEALgep
02-04-2004, 02:34 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Hey, I am the first to say that I hope they prove me wrong. I like it when Sox players perform well, but Hawk tends to exagerate about the Sox prospects, so if you are looking to him for evidence of future potential, then you are hearing what the company wants you to.

Makes you wonder exactly why he has hyped so many "can't miss" busts through the years. Maybe it is so Sox fans won't get so upset when the proven veterans leave via FA.

:fans
"Hawk said Willie Harris is the next coming of Kenny Lofton! WOOHOO! The leadoff slot is solved for the next decade..."

I like to see just a little more evidence myself...

My opinions aren't based on Hawk's. I have disagreed from time to time. I'm my own man. I assessed these guys being players well before Hawk made any comments on them, I just happen to agree.

KingXerxes
02-04-2004, 02:35 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Makes you wonder exactly why he has hyped so many "can't miss" busts through the years.

I don't wonder about that at all voodoochile.

KingXerxes
02-04-2004, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
You can see when Hawk talks about the Sox, that he has conviction in his words. You can't buy that.

When Harrelson broadcast Red Sox games with Dick Stockton - did he have conviction in his words? Yes he did. You can indeed buy that.

Again - let me please set for the record that I think very few announcers are "fans" of the team they cover in the same sense of regular people who are in fact fans.

ChiSoxBobette
02-04-2004, 02:46 PM
Its about time someone in the media said for everyone of those so-called unbiased chicago sports media personalities what we as White Sox fans have been saying forever , theres two different standards in Chicago when it come to reporting about its baseball teams and what the Hawk said about moronotti is true ,when has anyone who go's to White Sox games ever seen that weasel at Sox Park. Its just unbeleiveable that its taken this long for someone who works for the White Sox org. to explode but that last moronotti colum about the White Sox being the 3rd best team in the Chicago area was just way to much also to continue to report that the White Sox have basically no fan base is a slap in all of our faces , after that last colum moron best not step foot in Sox Park. WAY TO GO HAWK!

voodoochile
02-04-2004, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
My opinions aren't based on Hawk's. I have disagreed from time to time. I'm my own man. I assessed these guys being players well before Hawk made any comments on them, I just happen to agree.

Fair enough. I want to see some MLB level evidence personally. Like I said, I hope you (and Hawk) are right. I don't want to see this team fail, I just get tired of the same old hurry up and wait for the kids routine.

Here's hoping Rowand has .800+ OPS this season and Willie Harris (leading off) has an OBP pushing .400 and leads the majors in stolen bases. I would love to see it...

soxnut
02-04-2004, 03:44 PM
Here's a simple little thing about the biased media. After on the Bears losses, which officially ended any chance of making the playoffs, Brad Palmer says "with all the long faces in here I feel like I'm in the White Sox locker room"(or something to that effect). I mean, what is that? It's time for the media to step off....

Procol Harum
02-04-2004, 04:01 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
I just get tired of the same old hurry up and wait for the kids routine...



I'm tellin' ya--two years from now Tex Wortham, Ross Baumgarten, Francisco Barrios and Steve Trout will be the best rotation in MLB--mark my words!

34 Inch Stick
02-04-2004, 04:06 PM
Originally posted by Brian26
Not true.

The baserunning blunders were blamed on the baserunners and NOBODY else. This came up on the telecasts several times this year. At some point, it's not the fault of the coach if the runners aren't doing their job. Hawk even said at Soxfest that the Daubach/Jiminez baserunning blunder in Arizona was the worst he's ever seen.

I thought I was clear in my post that I was talking about what Hawk said on the SCORE on Monday. If not, that was the context I was speaking in. Hawk blamed everything on JM.

34 Inch Stick
02-04-2004, 04:18 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
That's not why he brought up range. Come on now. That was obviously his main point, but also he hit .409 in the minors, and when brought up, Manuel changed his approach at the plate and had him bunt all the time. That's not why he .409 in the minors and Hawk made that point even throughout the season.

As far as bringing him up slowly, because that's how you work guys into the majors isn't true. If they're good enough to start, you start them. That's the case with all teams and a majority of their rookies. Desi Relaford wasn't a utility man. Anyway, Harris has some major league games, so that point doesn't work anyway.

Since when is Hawk the PR focal point. The media is making him, if you believe he is indeed the focal point. Hawk says whats on his mind, much like Guillen. If we're all talking about it, and the media is talking about it, does that mean that was Hawk's and JR master plan to avoid talking about the team. Man some of you have some wild conspiracy theories. You can see when Hawk talks about the Sox, that he has conviction in his words. You can't buy that.

He didn't blame everything, but Manuel sets the tone in the club house, and it wasn't good all season. Guys had long faces. Guillen isn't going to let that happen, so why is Hawk's excitement of that have any bearing of his role for the Sox. I'm excited about that, JR didn't have to pay me a dime.

I guess you are the only one who heard the interview so I'll just take your word for it.

You are, of course, completely out there if you don't believe the value of easing a relative rookie into major league action. Only the very best prospects or desperate teams put rookies in high pressure situations. A rookie can be a starter and still be in a low pressure situation (as I outlined). Batting leadoff and playing second in a bad infield on a team hoping to make the playoffs is not low pressure.

I did not say Hawk was the focal point. Others in this thread made the statement and I was responding.

What did he not blame on Manuel?

Brian26
02-04-2004, 04:33 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
When Harrelson broadcast Red Sox games with Dick Stockton - did he have conviction in his words? Yes he did. You can indeed buy that.

Hawk's been the voice of the Sox for the better part of 22 years. Isn't it entirely possible that he truly does love the team? Even if he wasn't 100% behind the Sox in his heart back in 1982, I don't question his true colors in 2004. This guy bleeds black and silver.

SEALgep
02-04-2004, 04:37 PM
Originally posted by Brian26
Hawk's been the voice of the Sox for the better part of 22 years. Isn't it entirely possible that he truly does love the team? Even if he wasn't 100% behind the Sox in his heart back in 1982, I don't question his true colors in 2004. This guy bleeds black and silver.

There's no doubt.

Palehose13
02-04-2004, 04:38 PM
Originally posted by 34 Inch Stick
I guess you are the only one who heard the interview so I'll just take your word for it.

You are, of course, completely out there if you don't believe the value of easing a relative rookie into major league action. Only the very best prospects or desperate teams put rookies in high pressure situations. A rookie can be a starter and still be in a low pressure situation (as I outlined). Batting leadoff and playing second in a bad infield on a team hoping to make the playoffs is not low pressure.

I did not say Hawk was the focal point. Others in this thread made the statement and I was responding.

What did he not blame on Manuel?

I heard the interview. He did place a lot of blame on JM, but I think most of us here would agree with him. I am tired of the media bashing and belittling this organization every chance it gets. Of course some of it is deserved, but I don't think all of it is. It is about time someone in the organization stood up when being bad mouthed and told their side of the story. Everyone in Chicago was blaming KW for not signing R. Alomar, and then at Soxfest it came out that Robbie's agent was at fault. I'm tired of this organization sitting there and taking it up the ass whenever the media discredits them. I am sure that not all of it is true, and good for Hawk to decide to stand up and defend the Sox.

SEALgep
02-04-2004, 04:42 PM
Originally posted by 34 Inch Stick
I guess you are the only one who heard the interview so I'll just take your word for it.

You are, of course, completely out there if you don't believe the value of easing a relative rookie into major league action. Only the very best prospects or desperate teams put rookies in high pressure situations. A rookie can be a starter and still be in a low pressure situation (as I outlined). Batting leadoff and playing second in a bad infield on a team hoping to make the playoffs is not low pressure.

I did not say Hawk was the focal point. Others in this thread made the statement and I was responding.

What did he not blame on Manuel?

Harris has been eased, he's played in the majors. Now it's his time to start. He has a manager who will let him approach the plate how he has in the minors.

I don't think we have a bad infield. Valentin has made some bad throws, but he also made some very good plays as well. Harris has extended range. Crede showed he could flash the leather real well. Miguel defensively was very good. Konerko makes good picks. I really don't see a problem with our infield from a defensive standpoint. Especially are utility man known for having potential gold glove talent.

SEALgep
02-04-2004, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by Palehose13
I heard the interview. He did place a lot of blame on JM, but I think most of us here would agree with him. I am tired of the media bashing and belittling this organization every chance it gets. Of course some of it is deserved, but I don't think all of it is. It is about time someone in the organization stood up when being bad mouthed and told their side of the story. Everyone in Chicago was blaming KW for not signing R. Alomar, and then at Soxfest it came out that Robbie's agent was at fault. I'm tired of this organization sitting there and taking it up the ass whenever the media discredits them. I am sure that not all of it is true, and good for Hawk to decide to stand up and defend the Sox.

Totally agree.

34 Inch Stick
02-04-2004, 04:50 PM
Originally posted by Palehose13
I heard the interview. He did place a lot of blame on JM, but I think most of us here would agree with him. I am tired of the media bashing and belittling this organization every chance it gets. Of course some of it is deserved, but I don't think all of it is. It is about time someone in the organization stood up when being bad mouthed and told their side of the story. Everyone in Chicago was blaming KW for not signing R. Alomar, and then at Soxfest it came out that Robbie's agent was at fault. I'm tired of this organization sitting there and taking it up the ass whenever the media discredits them. I am sure that not all of it is true, and good for Hawk to decide to stand up and defend the Sox.

I heard it too. I was just being facetious with Seal.

I do place a lot of blame on JM as well. However you cannot deny that the one-two punch of Konerko and Koch killed us in the first half. Did you notice how he did not say a bad thing about a current player? He was optimistic to the point of not recognizing the Sox holes going into this year. He was not believable and North called him out on it.

KingXerxes
02-04-2004, 04:58 PM
Originally posted by 34 Inch Stick
Did you notice how he did not say a bad thing about a current player? He was optimistic to the point of not recognizing the Sox holes going into this year. He was not believable and North called him out on it.

He bayonettes the dead.

SEALgep
02-04-2004, 05:03 PM
Originally posted by 34 Inch Stick
I heard it too. I was just being facetious with Seal.

I do place a lot of blame on JM as well. However you cannot deny that the one-two punch of Konerko and Koch killed us in the first half. Did you notice how he did not say a bad thing about a current player? He was optimistic to the point of not recognizing the Sox holes going into this year. He was not believable and North called him out on it.

Hawk commented on Koch and Konerko throughout the whole season, and he also mentioned them at Sox Fest. He doesn't place the entire blame on JM as I said. He does think he was a major problem, which I think we all agree on. What you consider holes, others consider young talent getting a chance to prove what they can do. North questioned it, but while Hawk was on, he was very supportive of his words. He didn't agree with everything, but he did switch his tune from earlier.

ChiSox21
02-04-2004, 06:59 PM
Hawk is amazing compared to the Cubs announcer. Anyone who says Hawk is an idiot or doesn't know baseball is a moron. HE announces the game a different way which i like.

TornLabrum
02-04-2004, 07:37 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
The fact that guys like Mariotti and Bayless before were too afraid to step foot in the clubhouse for fear of Frank sticking his fists down their throats is indictment enough.

As I recall, Mariotti quit coming to the Sox clubhouse when Tony Phillips came close to sticking his fist down Mariotti's throat.

TornLabrum
02-04-2004, 07:40 PM
Originally posted by poorme
This is all masterminded by JR. What a joke. The gutless loser of an owner can't put a winner on the field, so the next best thing is to blame the media.

After Friday night, maybe Uncle Jer has learned that it's not good policy to blame the fans for everything that goes wrong.

TornLabrum
02-04-2004, 07:42 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
That "drunk old announcer" was one of the top baseball PBP men in the history of the game. He won awards from Sporting News as far back as the 40's for sportscaster of the year. He called it like it is.

Say what you want about Harry, when he was in his prime, he would call a spade a spade. If your team sucked, he wasn't afraid to say it.

Which is why Einhorn and Reinsdorf didn't want him on the south side.

TornLabrum
02-04-2004, 07:48 PM
Originally posted by Hullett_Fan
Greg and Bryant Gumbel grew up in Chicago. Greg started in sportscasting on Channel 5 News. One of them was a Sox fan and one was a Cubs fan (can't remember which).

Greg is a great broadcaster and did a good job on the Super Bowl (Phil Simms on the otherhand...).

Greg was the Sox fan, Bryant the Cubs fan.

TornLabrum
02-04-2004, 07:52 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
When Harrelson broadcast Red Sox games with Dick Stockton - did he have conviction in his words? Yes he did. You can indeed buy that.

Again - let me please set for the record that I think very few announcers are "fans" of the team they cover in the same sense of regular people who are in fact fans.

You are correct sir. An announcer is a fan of whoever is paying him to broadcast their games, more in some cities, less in others. I've read and heard from people from around the country that Chicago announcers are among the biggest "homers" in broadcasting.

PaleHoseGeorge
02-04-2004, 08:29 PM
What possible good can come from Hawk calling out the media is beyond me. Hell, I wouldn't put it pass some of them <cough> Marriotti!<cough>North!<cough> to deliberately say something negative just to bait Hawk and get him to mention their names on the air. Either Hawk backs down or this whole mess winds into a downward spiral very quickly.

This whole effort is counterproductive. The issue is on the field and in the front office. Anything that distracts us from solving those two issues only makes the Sox situation worse.

joecrede
02-04-2004, 08:52 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
What possible good can come from Hawk calling out the media is beyond me. Hell, I wouldn't put it pass some of them <cough> Marriotti!<cough>North!<cough> to deliberately say something negative just to bait Hawk and get him to mention their names on the air. Either Hawk backs down or this whole mess winds into a downward spiral very quickly.

This whole effort is counterproductive. The issue is on the field and in the front office. Anything that distracts us from solving those two issues only makes the Sox situation worse.

Have to admit part of me would love to see this thing turn into a complete fiasco. It might actually get me to turn up the volume during the telecasts. Which got me thinking ...

Why have announcers on TV in the first place? The Sox should do something totally radical with the audio portion of their telecasts. Like be the exclusive home of Rush Limbaugh, or some other highly rated radio talk show (Roe & Garry?). Bring people to the telecasts who aren't necessarily baseball fans. Crazy thought just thought I'd pass it along. :D:

KingXerxes
02-04-2004, 10:00 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Why have announcers on TV in the first place? The Sox should do something totally radical with the audio portion of their telecasts. Like be the exclusive home of Rush Limbaugh, or some other highly rated radio talk show (Roe & Garry?). Bring people to the telecasts who aren't necessarily baseball fans. Crazy thought just thought I'd pass it along. :D:

I would love it if they broadcast their games with an audio hookup to the PA system, and that's all. NBC (IIRC) did it once on a football game years ago and I loved it.

TornLabrum
02-04-2004, 10:34 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
I would love it if they broadcast their games with an audio hookup to the PA system, and that's all. NBC (IIRC) did it once on a football game years ago and I loved it.

You and I and my late father were probably the only ones who did.

Lip Man 1
02-04-2004, 10:44 PM
Palehose 13 says:

and then at Soxfest it came out that Robbie's agent was at fault.

and of course that the comments came from the Sox brass had "nothing" to do with it right? I'm sure Alomar and his agent have a different opinion.

Lip

SEALgep
02-04-2004, 11:00 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Palehose 13 says:

and then at Soxfest it came out that Robbie's agent was at fault.

and of course that the comments came from the Sox brass had "nothing" to do with it right? I'm sure Alomar and his agent have a different opinion.

Lip

The opinion of walking away from 3 million a year (1 million deferred) for 2 years, and then taking a 1 million dollar deal (300,000 deferred) 1 year deal. I'm sure they were of the opinion that they could get more, and then the facts became real clear.

wdelaney72
02-05-2004, 07:33 AM
When I said Hawk was a goof, I wasn't trying to discredit his knowledge of the game.

I absolutely love Hawk. I think he's THE best broadcaster in baseball. He's knowledgable, entertaining, and passionate. Hawk is one of things I love most about baseball.

That being said, he tends to be a little obnoxious at times. If Hawk stands up and defends the team against these idiot writers, that would be great. I just think non-Sox fans would not take him seriously due to his love of the organ-i-za-tion.

Palehose13
02-05-2004, 08:47 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Palehose 13 says:

and then at Soxfest it came out that Robbie's agent was at fault.

and of course that the comments came from the Sox brass had "nothing" to do with it right? I'm sure Alomar and his agent have a different opinion.

Lip

Many people here have the tendency to believe EVERYTHING negative written in the papers. Of course Alomar and his agent have a different opinion, and they let it be known through the media. No one here seemed to have a problem with that and were eager to believe that the blame laid solely with the White Sox organization. However, last weekend those at the fest were able to get a different angle on the story. Could it be possible that there is a little blame on BOTH sides? Most likely. However, us fans usually only get to hear the other side, and now we have become bitter and angry with the organization. I think it is wonderful that now we might hear the White Sox side of the story.

I had an epiphany at Soxfest (eternal pessimists, stop reading now). I am finding it hard to swallow that the people who run the White Sox are incompetent and/or just plain evil and only exist to piss us off. We really do have a good organization. No, I am not happy with consistently finishing 2nd or 3rd, but geez...there are some organizations that are just praying to get out of the cellar this decade. Do I agree with everything that the organization does? No. But I really do think they they are doing their best with what they have to win. Why wouldn't they??? They live and breathe White Sox baseball a hell of a lot more than we do.

Ok...I'm ready for everyone to start bashing me.

34 Inch Stick
02-05-2004, 09:29 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Hawk commented on Koch and Konerko throughout the whole season, and he also mentioned them at Sox Fest. He doesn't place the entire blame on JM as I said. He does think he was a major problem, which I think we all agree on. What you consider holes, others consider young talent getting a chance to prove what they can do. North questioned it, but while Hawk was on, he was very supportive of his words. He didn't agree with everything, but he did switch his tune from earlier.

For the second time Seal, my post is in the context of what was said on the SCORE. He mentioned neither. I hate getting personal but sometimes it does not seem like you read before you respond.

As far as the SCORE interview, you and I must have been listening to two different things. North told him he was crazy if he would rather have Harris than Alomar starting this year.

You are right North was more optimistic after the interview. I was more optimistic as well. Hawk had some good points but his advocating of Harris was unbelievable.

Seal, do you acknowledge any other holes besides Harris? This bullpen is weak, we have two question marks in the starting rotation going into spring training, our infield defense is below average, the outfield defense is slow and below average, our manager has 0 experience with pitching staffs and has already created a hostile environment with his star player.

SEALgep
02-05-2004, 09:59 AM
Originally posted by 34 Inch Stick
For the second time Seal, my post is in the context of what was said on the SCORE. He mentioned neither. I hate getting personal but sometimes it does not seem like you read before you respond.

As far as the SCORE interview, you and I must have been listening to two different things. North told him he was crazy if he would rather have Harris than Alomar starting this year.

You are right North was more optimistic after the interview. I was more optimistic as well. Hawk had some good points but his advocating of Harris was unbelievable.

Seal, do you acknowledge any other holes besides Harris? This bullpen is weak, we have two question marks in the starting rotation going into spring training, our infield defense is below average, the outfield defense is slow and below average, our manager has 0 experience with pitching staffs and has already created a hostile environment with his star player.

(Sigh) alright, let's go point by point.

The facts matter, if he said it throughout the entire season, why discount that. Why does it become non-existent because he did or did not mention it on the score. If you're going to bust him for his opinions and statements, you should at least know the whole story.

As far as Harris over Alomar, Harris has more range than Alomar in this stage of their careers. That's what he said, and he's right. As far as hitting, when Harris came up after hitting .409 in AAA, JM changed his batting approach. He had him bunt all the time, and Hawk mentioned that he should have been allowed to hit the way he did in the minors. Alomar is on the down leg of his career, although still good, Harris has plenty of upside if allowed to play the way that made him successful. I don't see a problem with this analysis.

I think our bullpen is strong, and easily the strongest in the Central. I believe Koch is going to rebound this year, and come close to his former self. Shingo is Sullivan's replacement, and will probably prove to be better. Pollite is replacing Gordon, and I believe will perform well, but Koch's rebound will offset some of Gordon's missing production. We still have Wunsch, Marte. We have guys like Person, and a bunch of good prospects that can easily replace Rick White and Gary Glover. Danny Wright was injured last year, and should rebound now that he is healthy- he's got good stuff and the year before he was injured he did pretty well.

Our infield defense is also improved and pretty good. Harris will have extended range from Jimenez, and also Alomar for that matter. Although Jose makes errors from time to time, he also makes some very good plays. Crede flashes the leather very well. Konerko, although slow, makes the picks in the dirt and any hard hit line drive anywhere near him. Miguel is a very good defensive catcher with a lot of upside for the future.

Our outfield is solid defensively. Maggs proved to be a very good defensive outfielder all season. Made many great grabs and proved difficult to run on his arm. Lee has made huge strides. He made tons of great plays last year, and proved he can play left with no lack of confidence. Rowand is good. People have debated this on this forum since I've been on here. My opinion is that he is a very good defender. He gets to his top speed in two steps, which takes lots of hard training to accomplish. He reads the ball well and gives up his body for the ball. He gets it done, plain and simple. The speed of all these guys is plenty fast.

Guillen doesn't have managerial experience, but neither did any of the best before they started out. Despite the lack of managerial experience, he has plenty of leadership experience. He's worked under some of the best around. He'll be fine. He's got a proven coaching staff around him that have embraced him. He's going to give some energy to this club, and at Sox Fest no one wasn't excited about it. Thomas and Guillen will be fine, and this whole thing is getting blown out of proportion. Youll see. Besides Thomas plays better with a chip on his shoulder.

soxnut
02-05-2004, 10:23 AM
Great post SEALgep!! :smile:

soxtalker
02-05-2004, 10:25 AM
Originally posted by 34 Inch Stick
... North told him he was crazy if he would rather have Harris than Alomar starting this year.

You are right North was more optimistic after the interview. I was more optimistic as well. Hawk had some good points but his advocating of Harris was unbelievable...


Originally posted by SEALgep
...As far as Harris over Alomar, Harris has more range than Alomar in this stage of their careers. That's what he said, and he's right. As far as hitting, when Harris came up after hitting .409 in AAA, JM changed his batting approach. He had him bunt all the time, and Hawk mentioned that he should have been allowed to hit the way he did in the minors. Alomar is on the down leg of his career, although still good, Harris has plenty of upside if allowed to play the way that made him successful. I don't see a problem with this analysis....

I only heard part of the interview, but it was the portion focusing on Harris vs. Alomar. It seemed to me that North was trying to pin Hawk down to an either-or decision between Harris and Alomar. Hawk, on the other hand, seemed to be trying to bring up the other factors that were involved in such a decision (e.g., budget and impact on ability to sign other players). One can question the validity of those other factors, but it doesn't seem right to just ignore them.

soxnut
02-05-2004, 10:27 AM
Originally posted by Palehose13
Many people here have the tendency to believe EVERYTHING negative written in the papers. Of course Alomar and his agent have a different opinion, and they let it be known through the media. No one here seemed to have a problem with that and were eager to believe that the blame laid solely with the White Sox organization. However, last weekend those at the fest were able to get a different angle on the story. Could it be possible that there is a little blame on BOTH sides? Most likely. However, us fans usually only get to hear the other side, and now we have become bitter and angry with the organization. I think it is wonderful that now we might hear the White Sox side of the story.

I had an epiphany at Soxfest (eternal pessimists, stop reading now). I am finding it hard to swallow that the people who run the White Sox are incompetent and/or just plain evil and only exist to piss us off. We really do have a good organization. No, I am not happy with consistently finishing 2nd or 3rd, but geez...there are some organizations that are just praying to get out of the cellar this decade. Do I agree with everything that the organization does? No. But I really do think they they are doing their best with what they have to win. Why wouldn't they??? They live and breathe White Sox baseball a hell of a lot more than we do.

Ok...I'm ready for everyone to start bashing me.


Well, you may get bashed, but it won't be by me. I like your post and basically agree with it. I like to stay positive. It's a shame that people can only be postive when everything is obvious.

SEALgep
02-05-2004, 10:31 AM
Originally posted by soxtalker
I only heard part of the interview, but it was the portion focusing on Harris vs. Alomar. It seemed to me that North was trying to pin Hawk down to an either-or decision between Harris and Alomar. Hawk, on the other hand, seemed to be trying to bring up the other factors that were involved in such a decision (e.g., budget and impact on ability to sign other players). One can question the validity of those other factors, but it doesn't seem right to just ignore them.

Sure that all plays into it. I'm not saying I or the Sox didn't want Alomar. He chose to take less money (or was forced to after he found out the Sox made the best offer) and go elsewhere. All Hawk was saying, and I agree in full, is that Harris is now our best option. We aren't in a bad spot because of Alomar's decision. Harris will prove to be a good player,and it will be nice to have someone on the team with his kind of speed.

SEALgep
02-05-2004, 10:31 AM
Originally posted by soxnut
Well, you may get bashed, but it won't be by me. I like your post and basically agree with it. I like to stay positive. It's a shame that people can only be postive when everything is obvious.

I agree, this was another good post.

Palehose13
02-05-2004, 10:48 AM
Originally posted by soxnut
Well, you may get bashed, but it won't be by me. I like your post and basically agree with it. I like to stay positive. It's a shame that people can only be positive when everything is obvious.

Thanks soxnut and Seal.

I really did have a change of heart Friday night at the seminar. I was in the front row and there was no doubt that Kenny Williams was full of passion, and I don't think that you can fake that. If you will allow me to, I will go through my thought process that lead to my change of heart. If not, stop reading now and skip to the next post.

Ok...so I came into Friday's seminar as pissed at the next fan wondering why these people (the front office) was doing nothing to give us a championship ball club. Then I saw the passion that KW and Ozzie had and really respected how he wanted to answer everyone's question. For those that weren't there, KW went over the time limit and would have kept going if the Hyatt staff didn't tell us that we had to leave.

Then I started thinking...This is this man's JOB, his LIFE. Hell, I'm a fan. The White Sox provide me with entertainment and enjoyment, but are not my lifeblood. Teaching is my lifeblood and I do everything that I possibly can to give my students the best possible education. Sometimes I fail. Sometimes they fail. Sometimes I don't have the supplies and budget to compete with the suburban schools (I teach in mps). But, in spite of all of that, every day I try my personal best. Since the Sox is to KW as teaching is to me, why would I expect him to be doing less? Why would I think that he doesn't want to win the division? It only makes him look bad if he doesn't. Do you think I WANT low test scores? No, but I am doing the best with the hand that I am dealt...which brings us to JR. Now, in all honesty, we have NO IDEA what goes on behind closed doors. We don't know what the other shareholders want or what constraints JR has placed on him and thus places them on KW. Bottom line is that it is their business. I can chose to not follow or buy the product if I don't like what they are doing. So, I guess I have turned into what some would call a "Pollyanna" and am going to put my faith in Sox brass. Of course, I don't and won't agree with every decision that the front office makes, but on the other hand I understand that I don't and will probably never know all the circumstances that led to that decision. As a fan, all I am going to do now is trust and hope.

Seal and soxnut...hope that I didn't scare you away. :cool:

34 Inch Stick
02-05-2004, 10:49 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
(Sigh) alright, let's go point by point.

The facts matter, if he said it throughout the entire season, why discount that. Why does it become non-existent because he did or did not mention it on the score. If you're going to bust him for his opinions and statements, you should at least know the whole story.

As far as Harris over Alomar, Harris has more range than Alomar in this stage of their careers. That's what he said, and he's right. As far as hitting, when Harris came up after hitting .409 in AAA, JM changed his batting approach. He had him bunt all the time, and Hawk mentioned that he should have been allowed to hit the way he did in the minors. Alomar is on the down leg of his career, although still good, Harris has plenty of upside if allowed to play the way that made him successful. I don't see a problem with this analysis.

I think our bullpen is strong, and easily the strongest in the Central. I believe Koch is going to rebound this year, and come close to his former self. Shingo is Sullivan's replacement, and will probably prove to be better. Pollite is replacing Gordon, and I believe will perform well, but Koch's rebound will offset some of Gordon's missing production. We still have Wunsch, Marte. We have guys like Person, and a bunch of good prospects that can easily replace Rick White and Gary Glover. Danny Wright was injured last year, and should rebound now that he is healthy- he's got good stuff and the year before he was injured he did pretty well.

Our infield defense is also improved and pretty good. Harris will have extended range from Jimenez, and also Alomar for that matter. Although Jose makes errors from time to time, he also makes some very good plays. Crede flashes the leather very well. Konerko, although slow, makes the picks in the dirt and any hard hit line drive anywhere near him. Miguel is a very good defensive catcher with a lot of upside for the future.

Our outfield is solid defensively. Maggs proved to be a very good defensive outfielder all season. Made many great grabs and proved difficult to run on his arm. Lee has made huge strides. He made tons of great plays last year, and proved he can play left with no lack of confidence. Rowand is good. People have debated this on this forum since I've been on here. My opinion is that he is a very good defender. He gets to his top speed in two steps, which takes lots of hard training to accomplish. He reads the ball well and gives up his body for the ball. He gets it done, plain and simple. The speed of all these guys is plenty fast.

Guillen doesn't have managerial experience, but neither did any of the best before they started out. Despite the lack of managerial experience, he has plenty of leadership experience. He's worked under some of the best around. He'll be fine. He's got a proven coaching staff around him that have embraced him. He's going to give some energy to this club, and at Sox Fest no one wasn't excited about it. Thomas and Guillen will be fine, and this whole thing is getting blown out of proportion. Youll see. Besides Thomas plays better with a chip on his shoulder.

Reserve the sighs for anyone who has to read through your posts! O.K. your air tight argument has sold me. Every player who had a down year last year will suddenly be great again. The young players, while not highly thought of, will all produce at a high level.

SEALgep
02-05-2004, 10:53 AM
Originally posted by Palehose13
Thanks soxnut and Seal.

I really did have a change of heart Friday night at the seminar. I was in the front row and there was no doubt that Kenny Williams was full of passion, and I don't think that you can fake that. If you will allow me to, I will go through my thought process that lead to my change of heart. If not, stop reading now and skip to the next post.

Ok...so I came into Friday's seminar as pissed at the next fan wondering why these people (the front office) was doing nothing to give us a championship ball club. Then I saw the passion that KW and Ozzie had and really respected how he wanted to answer everyone's question. For those that weren't there, KW went over the time limit and would have kept going if the Hyatt staff didn't tell us that we had to leave.

Then I started thinking...This is this man's JOB, his LIFE. Hell, I'm a fan. The White Sox provide me with entertainment and enjoyment, but are not my lifeblood. Teaching is my lifeblood and I do everything that I possibly can to give my students the best possible education. Sometimes I fail. Sometimes they fail. Sometimes I don't have the supplies and budget to compete with the suburban schools (I teach in mps). But, in spite of all of that, every day I try my personal best. Since the Sox is to KW as teaching is to me, why would I expect him to be doing less? Why would I think that he doesn't want to win the division? It only makes him look bad if he doesn't. Do you think I WANT low test scores? No, but I am doing the best with the hand that I am dealt...which brings us to JR. Now, in all honesty, we have NO IDEA what goes on behind closed doors. We don't know what the other shareholders want or what constraints JR has placed on him and thus places them on KW. Bottom line is that it is their business. I can chose to not follow or buy the product if I don't like what they are doing. So, I guess I have turned into what some would call a "Pollyanna" and am going to put my faith in Sox brass. Of course, I don't and won't agree with every decision that the front office makes, but on the other hand I understand that I don't and will probably never know all the circumstances that led to that decision. As a fan, all I am going to do now is trust and hope.

Seal and soxnut...hope that I didn't scare you away. :cool:

That won't scare me away, I've been trying to convey this to the some of the other people here. You're right on. I'm glad you said it. I was there Saturday and Sunday, but I missed Friday unfortunately. Thanks for the perspective. I feel the same way.

SEALgep
02-05-2004, 10:56 AM
Originally posted by 34 Inch Stick
Reserve the sighs for anyone who has to read through your posts! O.K. your air tight argument has sold me. Every player who had a down year last year will suddenly be great again. The young players, while not highly thought of, will all produce at a high level.

I'm glad I was able to convince you, but don't take it too far. I never said we had an all star team. I said we have good players who perform, and that for the most part, we have a very solid team. I believe we will win the division. If I convinced of that, very well. I'm happy to oblige.

Lip Man 1
02-05-2004, 01:09 PM
Pale Hose 13:

I only know what I see, especially over the past 23 years....

Still waiting for a trip to the World Series and an ownership that now has the Sox a far distant second in the city in popularity, potential, media coverage and all the things are are essential to long term success both on and off the field. And the sad thing is they are in this position because of mistakes that they themselves created, not because of chance or circumstances. These are the same people who 'work so hard, and care so much about the Sox.'

Lip

SSN721
02-05-2004, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by Palehose13
Thanks soxnut and Seal.

I really did have a change of heart Friday night at the seminar. I was in the front row and there was no doubt that Kenny Williams was full of passion, and I don't think that you can fake that. If you will allow me to, I will go through my thought process that lead to my change of heart. If not, stop reading now and skip to the next post.

Ok...so I came into Friday's seminar as pissed at the next fan wondering why these people (the front office) was doing nothing to give us a championship ball club. Then I saw the passion that KW and Ozzie had and really respected how he wanted to answer everyone's question. For those that weren't there, KW went over the time limit and would have kept going if the Hyatt staff didn't tell us that we had to leave.

Then I started thinking...This is this man's JOB, his LIFE. Hell, I'm a fan. The White Sox provide me with entertainment and enjoyment, but are not my lifeblood. Teaching is my lifeblood and I do everything that I possibly can to give my students the best possible education. Sometimes I fail. Sometimes they fail. Sometimes I don't have the supplies and budget to compete with the suburban schools (I teach in mps). But, in spite of all of that, every day I try my personal best. Since the Sox is to KW as teaching is to me, why would I expect him to be doing less? Why would I think that he doesn't want to win the division? It only makes him look bad if he doesn't. Do you think I WANT low test scores? No, but I am doing the best with the hand that I am dealt...which brings us to JR. Now, in all honesty, we have NO IDEA what goes on behind closed doors. We don't know what the other shareholders want or what constraints JR has placed on him and thus places them on KW. Bottom line is that it is their business. I can chose to not follow or buy the product if I don't like what they are doing. So, I guess I have turned into what some would call a "Pollyanna" and am going to put my faith in Sox brass. Of course, I don't and won't agree with every decision that the front office makes, but on the other hand I understand that I don't and will probably never know all the circumstances that led to that decision. As a fan, all I am going to do now is trust and hope.

Seal and soxnut...hope that I didn't scare you away. :cool:

Excellent post palehose, I very much agree with the majority of it. I also detect the passion from KW everytime I hear him interviewed or any time he is speaking, and I also agree it is something that is hard to fake. I feel he genuinely has a great enthusiasm for this team and this game. I just hope that soon that passion and dedication I seem to detect from him pays off in more than finishing second, because a few years from now if this team has still done no better than 2nd or 1st round playoff sweep/loss then I must say he might not just be right for this job, regardless of his feelings and dedication. I truly hope that KW lives up to what I think of him. :D:
otherwise
:whiner: :angry:

Palehose13
02-05-2004, 01:36 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Pale Hose 13:

I only know what I see, especially over the past 23 years....

Still waiting for a trip to the World Series and an ownership that now has the Sox a far distant second in the city in popularity, potential, media coverage and all the things are are essential to long term success both on and off the field. And the sad thing is they are in this position because of mistakes that they themselves created, not because of chance or circumstances. These are the same people who 'work so hard, and care so much about the Sox.'

Lip
I understand, but I am not at the "pessimist" point yet. Give me 10 years and then we can reevaluate.

Palehose13
02-05-2004, 01:40 PM
Originally posted by SSN721
Excellent post palehose, I very much agree with the majority of it. I also detect the passion from KW everytime I hear him interviewed or any time he is speaking, and I also agree it is something that is hard to fake. I feel he genuinely has a great enthusiasm for this team and this game. I just hope that soon that passion and dedication I seem to detect from him pays off in more than finishing second, because a few years from now if this team has still done no better than 2nd or 1st round playoff sweep/loss then I must say he might not just be right for this job, regardless of his feelings and dedication. I truly hope that KW lives up to what I think of him. :D:
otherwise
:whiner: :angry:
Thank you. I would love to be consistent division champions, but I guess I am going to go with "the glass is half-full" thinking and be content with being respectable year in and year out instead of being a consistent laughing stock. That last sentence in no way means that I don't want to win a world series or that I am happy finishing second. But if I had a choose, I would rather be constantly in second that constantly in last. IMHO baseball is the purist of all major sports, and I believe that every year anything can happen. The Diamondbacks, Angels, and now Marlins have proven this to us.

soxnut
02-05-2004, 07:42 PM
Originally posted by Palehose13
Thanks soxnut and Seal.

I really did have a change of heart Friday night at the seminar. I was in the front row and there was no doubt that Kenny Williams was full of passion, and I don't think that you can fake that. If you will allow me to, I will go through my thought process that lead to my change of heart. If not, stop reading now and skip to the next post.

Ok...so I came into Friday's seminar as pissed at the next fan wondering why these people (the front office) was doing nothing to give us a championship ball club. Then I saw the passion that KW and Ozzie had and really respected how he wanted to answer everyone's question. For those that weren't there, KW went over the time limit and would have kept going if the Hyatt staff didn't tell us that we had to leave.

Then I started thinking...This is this man's JOB, his LIFE. Hell, I'm a fan. The White Sox provide me with entertainment and enjoyment, but are not my lifeblood. Teaching is my lifeblood and I do everything that I possibly can to give my students the best possible education. Sometimes I fail. Sometimes they fail. Sometimes I don't have the supplies and budget to compete with the suburban schools (I teach in mps). But, in spite of all of that, every day I try my personal best. Since the Sox is to KW as teaching is to me, why would I expect him to be doing less? Why would I think that he doesn't want to win the division? It only makes him look bad if he doesn't. Do you think I WANT low test scores? No, but I am doing the best with the hand that I am dealt...which brings us to JR. Now, in all honesty, we have NO IDEA what goes on behind closed doors. We don't know what the other shareholders want or what constraints JR has placed on him and thus places them on KW. Bottom line is that it is their business. I can chose to not follow or buy the product if I don't like what they are doing. So, I guess I have turned into what some would call a "Pollyanna" and am going to put my faith in Sox brass. Of course, I don't and won't agree with every decision that the front office makes, but on the other hand I understand that I don't and will probably never know all the circumstances that led to that decision. As a fan, all I am going to do now is trust and hope.

Seal and soxnut...hope that I didn't scare you away. :cool:

Hey that doesn't scare me away. I love the way you think. This is entertainment, entertainment that I love, and will always be a fan. The hardest thing to do is be a fan and to think positively when things go bad, but hey I'm there.

And really, things aren't as bad as many make it out to be. I know the Sox haven't won a World Series in our lifetime, but hey, hopefully it'll happen sooner rather than later. There can only be one winner, I'd love for it to be the Sox. But if not, I do want us to be at least respectable and make it to the playoffs more than they have. Some people probably act worse about the Sox and sports in general than the kids you teach.

The more sour people get, the worse I think things get. The tighter people hold on to sour feelings, the easier the good time feelings they can have, will slip through their fingers.

The games have to be played, or why bother playing them at all? How great of a story would it be if this team does go all the way this year? The best stories are usually the ones that are a pleasant surprise :smile:

Palehose13
02-05-2004, 07:57 PM
soxnut-
Excellent. Nice to see that I am not the only one. I was starting to feel lonely! :(:

But back to the topic...GO HAWK!!! Tell your side of it. I'm tired of reading Moronotti, etc. and not getting any response from the Sox.

SEALgep
02-05-2004, 08:07 PM
Originally posted by Palehose13
soxnut-
Excellent. Nice to see that I am not the only one. I was starting to feel lonely! :(:

But back to the topic...GO HAWK!!! Tell your side of it. I'm tired of reading Moronotti, etc. and not getting any response from the Sox.

Did you hear him today, and yesterday, and the day before too? It's just ignorant. His facts are completely backwards. I hate, especially when people in the media give misleading information. They do their homework only if it fits their arguments. I want the number to call in, because I know people are listening to him and saying, " Really, I didn't know that." Just ridiculous. I want Hawk to call in, even better.

Palehose13
02-05-2004, 08:09 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Did you hear him today, and yesterday, and the day before too? It's just ignorant. His facts are completely backwards. I hate, especially when people in the media give misleading information. They do their homework only if it fits their arguments. I want the number to call in, because I know people are listening to him and saying, " Really, I didn't know that." Just ridiculous. I want Hawk to call in, even better.

No. I can only listen to the radio on my lunch and during my prep hour...when I am in the room. However, I am sure that he was as moronic as always.

SEALgep
02-05-2004, 08:35 PM
Originally posted by Palehose13
No. I can only listen to the radio on my lunch and during my prep hour...when I am in the room. However, I am sure that he was as moronic as always.

He brings it up every chance he gets. He says Hawk blames him for everything that has ever faltered the Sox. Hawk mearly said that the medias negative portrayal of the Sox does nothing good for the club or it's fans, and he goes on and on in exaggerate fashion that Hawk blamed him in particular and starts bringing up stupid stuff. It's very annoying. He keeps saying he's JR's puppet. Unbelieveable.

soxnut
02-05-2004, 09:48 PM
Originally posted by Palehose13
soxnut-
Excellent. Nice to see that I am not the only one. I was starting to feel lonely! :(:

But back to the topic...GO HAWK!!! Tell your side of it. I'm tired of reading Moronotti, etc. and not getting any response from the Sox.

Yeah GO HAWK!!!, that's for sure. I haven't read Moronotti lately, and I haven't listened to his show yet. I'm glad there is a local show on espn1000, but it's too bad it's him. Now there are morons in that time slot on both sportradio stations. :(: :(:

Lip Man 1
02-05-2004, 09:52 PM
Seal:

Ummm you realize Hawk is Jerry's puppett don't you? The man is paid by him. There is no such thing as objectivity by the Sox announcers because they can't. If they go to far they may not have their contract renewed. Hawk, DJ, Rooney and Farmer are paid by the Sox and not the radio / TV stations they work for (unfortunately--not like the old days) They do the best they can under difficult circumstances.

And correct me if I'm wrong but it was Hawk who called out Jay specifically wasn't it. If Hawk wanted to go after the media in general, he should have stated it that way and not called out people.

I got an e-mail a few days ago from a columnists (not Jay) a guy who's pretty tame but even he saw where this is going to lead to.

If Hawk starts making an issue out of Chicago's media, the first moment Hawk screws up on the air, or says something stupid (like his I'd rather have Harris over Alomar comment) he's going to get drilled and by proxy the Sox.

He should shut up period. If you want good publicity WIN something. Stop blaming everyone else for problems created by the Sox themselves. (I don't mean you but the Sox organization-- I wanted to make that distinction)

Lip

joecrede
02-05-2004, 10:02 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
[B]Seal:

Ummm you realize Hawk is Jerry's puppett don't you? The man is paid by him. There is no such thing as objectivity by the Sox announcers because they can't.

Or any other teams broadcasters ...

Lip, everyone knows Harrelson's point of view and can judge what he says accordingly. The same cannot be said for Mariotti, Tribune columnists, or any of the other so-called unbaised media.

Palehose13
02-05-2004, 10:09 PM
Stop blaming everyone else for problems created by the Sox themselves.
But how are you so certain that alll of the "problems" are created by the Sox themselves? You don't think the media has anything to do any of the "problems"?

Lip Man 1
02-05-2004, 10:17 PM
Pale Hose 13:

Please tell me how the media creates the Sox problems?

Did the media put words in Uncle Jerry's mouth at Sox Fantasy Camp? Did the media say the things Eddie Einhorn said that caused so much reaction on this site? Did the media build a terrible ballpark? Did the media help support the labor impasse of 94-95 or cause the White Flag Trade in 97? Did the media say 'Chicago has always been a Cubs town...'

Just wondering.

Joe:

And you notice I said the Sox broadcasters do the best they can under difficult circumstances. Sox announcers have a conflict of interest exactly like the reporters for the Tribune. No difference. if you're going to attack the Tribune writers then you need to be as vigilant attacking the Sox announcers. And for the record at least one Tribune reporter Phil Rogers admitted on this site in his interview that it was a conflict of interest. When was the last time Sox announcers made their conflict of interest public?

Lip

joecrede
02-05-2004, 10:39 PM
[quote]
Joe:

And you notice I said the Sox broadcasters do the best they can under difficult circumstances. Sox announcers have a conflict of interest exactly like the reporters for the Tribune. No difference. if you're going to attack the Tribune writers then you need to be as vigilant attacking the Sox announcers. And for the record at least one Tribune reporter Phil Rogers admitted on this site in his interview that it [I]was a conflict of interest. When was the last time Sox announcers made their conflict of interest public?

Lip

White Sox broadcasters are employed to give the White Sox point of view during broadcasts. They are not expected to be unbaised.

The Sun-Times, Tribune, etc... are sources for news and as such have ethical standards that they should uphold. In my view, the Tribune ethics are compromised whenever they write about baseball. It's fine for Phil Rogers to admit to the conflict of interest here, but I think the Tribune would be better served if they ran a disclaimer at the end of every baseball article disclosing their ownership of the Cubs.

soxnut
02-05-2004, 10:50 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
White Sox broadcasters are employed to give the White Sox point of view during broadcasts. They are not expected to be unbaised.

The Sun-Times, Tribune, etc... are sources for news and as such have ethical standards that they should uphold. In my view, the Tribune ethics are compromised whenever they write about baseball. It's fine for Phil Rogers to admit to the conflict of interest here, but I think the Tribune would be better served if they ran a disclaimer at the end of every baseball article disclosing their ownership of the Cubs.


THANK YOU :D:


I don't know why some people even bother being Sox fans. all they do is bring up the past and bitch. I don't know how they live with themselves.

soxnut
02-05-2004, 11:04 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Lip Man 1
[B]Pale Hose 13:

Please tell me how the media creates the Sox problems?

Did the media build a terrible ballpark?

It's not a terrible ballpark...but the media has biased people into thinking it is....

Did the media help support the labor impasse of 94-95 ---basically all teams supported that so...........


or cause the White Flag Trade in 97?
They weren't going to catch Cleveland, that team didn't know situational hitting from a hole in the ground.

Did the media say 'Chicago has always been a Cubs town...'


any time any TV show comes to Chicago, they always show that Wrigley Field sign...or mention the cutsie Cubbies.

Since I can remember, even before JR owned the team, it always seemed the Cubs highlights on the news were hyped more or shown more. I'm almost always amazed still, when a Sox highlight/story is shown before a Cubs highlight/story


Also, the whole "Jerry Springer" like seminar last friday, was no such thing. But, it was reported in the paper that way.

Also as I said in a previous post, Brad Palmer talking in the BEARS locker room after a game, and throwing a shot out about the Sox.

Also, anytime the Sox do something wrong, the media makes it out to be a MAJOR gaff, but when the Cubs make a similar gaff, it's ok, they're just the cute lovable losers.

The media doesn't have to say it's a Cubs town, they're actions speak louder than words..............

ma-gaga
02-06-2004, 09:29 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Ummm you realize Hawk is Jerry's puppett don't you? The man is paid by him. There is no such thing as objectivity by the Sox announcers because they can't. If they go to far they may not have their contract renewed. Hawk, DJ, Rooney and Farmer are paid by the Sox and not the radio / TV stations they work for (unfortunately--not like the old days) They do the best they can under difficult circumstances.


Is this true with all teams?
I thought that Fox Sport Net paid the announcers for the Twins.

Sports announcers have one of the hardest jobs. They have to to walk the line between being a biased fan and a unbiased professional. The best local guy I've heard was Kevin Harlan for the T-Wolves. He was amazing, then he got snapped up by TNT. :(: I think that ESPN has a gem in Gary Thorn. He does NHL broadcasts, but he's an amazing baseball announcer as well.

Gary Miller is amazing too, but he's teamed up with one of the worst color commentators, Joe Morgan, which KILLS those broadcasts.

The national guys from FOX are terrible. Buck = ugh. McCarver = double ugh. Steve Lyons' = please shoot me. I don't like the Cubs crap either for the same reasons.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 10:30 AM
Now that we've established the fact that local broadcasters are compensated/approved by the clubs they broadcast - can we move on to what the issue is?

There are degrees to everything, and Ken Harrelson is a house lackey to an insufferable degree. Never in my life have I seen an organization use it's play-by-play man to such a stupid extent. To have him sitting next to Kenny Williams answering questions regarding personnel moves is insane. Then he runs out and "calls out the media" - I think Lip said it best, they will turn this guy into a cartoonish figure (although he seems to be doing a good job of that himself).

An announcer - at least historically - is supposed to be an excitable "fan" who can speak in full sentences (notable exception - Joe Carter) - while one can make a case that this certainly suits Harrelson in some context, there can be absolutely no denying that he has also morphed into the role of major insider/apologist for this organization and that totally serves to detract from his credibility in the traditional announcer capacity.

:hawk

"There's strike three called on Willie Harris...Mercy.........and the ballgame is over..............now you just watch DJ - tomorrow's papers are going to be full of nothing but the bad news surrounding today's game - I'll bet my life on it."

:DJ

"But this is the fourth straight game we've been shut out - what should the papers be writing about?"

:hawk

"How about the fact that we hit many many more hard foul balls today.....or about the back to back walks we got in the fourth - that's the kind of stuff that I'm talking about - the stuff that the media won't print. And I am dadgummed sick of it!"

Lip Man 1
02-06-2004, 10:38 AM
Sox Nut says: "Since I can remember, even before JR owned the team, it always seemed the Cubs highlights on the news were hyped more or shown more. I'm almost always amazed still, when a Sox highlight/story is shown before a Cubs highlight/story"

Sox, obviously you weren't around during the late 50's, through the mid 60's, 1972 and 1977. Particularly through the 50's and 60's NOBODY and I mean nobody outside of those living on the North side gave one iota about the Cubs and that includes the media. They covered the Cubs because thay had to but in those days Wrigley wasn't populated by yuppies, the Cubs lost 90+ games practically every year while the Sox were the only team to give the Yankees a race and had a winning season every year from 1951 - 1967.

I see where yoiu are coming from since you don't know any better but your impression is incorrect.

From a personal note anybody who starts blaming the media for the problems of the Sox is becomming as delusional as the Sox organization themselves. Through luck or design the Cubs own the town and that's not the media's fault. I know saying that hurts and it bothers me as well but what bothers me more is the fact that the Sox are their own worst enemies and refuse to do ANYTHING to try to reverse the situation.

That's the 'defeatist' attitude Bob Vanderberg was talking about.

Lip

Lip Man 1
02-06-2004, 10:53 AM
With thanks to HellenicSoxFan, here's a few more "problems," caused by that 'mean, old, lazy, insensitive, Cubbie loving, Sox hating,' Chicago media:

The team hasn't won the World Series since 1917
or even been there since 1959.

The team over the years has been rumored to be moving to Denver, Seattle, Tampa and I'm sure to other places I don't remember.

Their games were pulled off free TV and put on pay TV.

When the team has been good, management has never made the bold move to put them over the top.

In 1994, when the team had a good chance to win everything, the owners were more concerned with winning the strike than winning the World Series.

The owners have let the team become an afterthought in the city, thereby helping the dreaded Cubbies become bigger than they deserve.

The owners raise ticket prices, lose free agents and blame the fans for all the problems.

Yep that's certainly ALL the media's fault...LOL

Lip

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
With thanks to HellenicSoxFan, here's a few more "problems," caused by that 'mean, old, lazy, insensitive, Cubbie loving, Sox hating,' Chicago media:

The team hasn't won the World Series since 1917
or even been there since 1959.

The team over the years has been rumored to be moving to Denver, Seattle, Tampa and I'm sure to other places I don't remember.

Their games were pulled off free TV and put on pay TV.

When the team has been good, management has never made the bold move to put them over the top.

In 1994, when the team had a good chance to win everything, the owners were more concerned with winning the strike than winning the World Series.

The owners have let the team become an afterthought in the city, thereby helping the dreaded Cubbies become bigger than they deserve.

The owners raise ticket prices, lose free agents and blame the fans for all the problems.

Yep that's certainly ALL the media's fault...LOL

Lip

You're exaggerating as well. Saying they blamed the media and the fans is a misinterpretation to what was actually said.

soxnut
02-06-2004, 11:07 AM
Sure Lip, I understand alot of what you're saying. I have only been a fan since '75(8yrs old). So, for all the 50's 60's stuff I wasn't around.

But the Sox still seemed to get bashed more about dumb moves that they do, and like i said when the Cubs would do the same thing, it wouldn't get the same harsh treatment. So, besides the Sox doing things that make it difficult on themselves, the media seems to fuel the fire a little.

And when it comes to the Sox not winning a Series since '17 and not being in one since '59, it doesn't get romanticized about like it does for the Cubs and Red Sox.(not that it should be romanticized, but I think you know what I mean)

Ah, well, whatever it's all frustrating.....But I'm still a fan, and I'm still going to go to games, and watch on tv. :smile:

rdivaldi
02-06-2004, 11:09 AM
Through luck or design the Cubs own the town and that's not the media's fault.

Speaking of delusional, you'd have to be to think that the Flubbie games being on WGN, having that beloved drunk announcer rant on and on about the beautiful ballpark, and being owned by the biggest media outlet in the city didn't have a major role in the Flubbie takeover in the 80's.

While the media isn't soley responsible for the inequities in the two teams public image, it played a very major role...

ma-gaga
02-06-2004, 11:14 AM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
There are degrees to everything, and Ken Harrelson is a house lackey to an insufferable degree. Never in my life have I seen an organization use it's play-by-play man to such a stupid extent. To have him sitting next to Kenny Williams answering questions regarding personnel moves is insane.


[checking baseball-ref] ok, so Hawk (http://www.baseball-reference.com/h/harreke01.shtml) played baseball for 9 seasons, had one fantastic one where he finished 3rd in MVP voting, then dropped off the map. Never played for the W.Sox. [\checking baseball-ref]

I don't get it. Typically they hire a 'baseball' mind as an analyst, and someone associated with the team. The second being more important than the first. hmm... Is Hawk the 'color man' or 'play by play'?!? Play by play is usually done by some geek who couldn't play professional ball, and the color commentary is provided by the ex-jock.

Regardless, these guys (color and pbp) probably spend a lot more time thinking about baseball then we do, are able to scout out games, and probably do have a fairly good handle on which personel moves would work on players that they've seen.

Now it's the GM's job to have a handle on the entire situation. Is KW dumb enough to put himself in that no win situation? Unless he is EXACTLY on the same page as the announcer, he should not get up on stage with them to debate personel moves. The color analyst/pbp guy can have his say, but I am shocked that the organization is that incompetent.

If nothing else it's just bad PR. It undercuts the GM's authority. I know that T.Ryan of the Twins does NOT debate with anyone. I've heard people try to corner him, he doesn't take it at all. He blasts with the typical straw man arguments: "you have to see him as a scout" and "we're talking about a human being, not a set of numbers here" and "we have a plan, and he's a big part of that plan". He's right, and there's no arguments against that.

Maybe I'm just misunderstanding what the situation was, but it sounds terrible and extremely frustrating for everyone involved.

ma-gaga
02-06-2004, 11:17 AM
oh, I never threw in what I wanted to say:

Hawk is insufferable. He's biased, petty and bitter. There's some charm in having the most annoying announcer in baseball...

but not a lot.

rdivaldi
02-06-2004, 11:18 AM
There's some charm in having the most annoying announcer in baseball...

He's not even the most annoying announcer in the city...

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 11:25 AM
Originally posted by ma-gaga
Hawk is insufferable. He's biased, petty and bitter. There's some charm in having the most annoying announcer in baseball...

but not a lot.

If he only acted as the announcer I would agree there would be a certain amount of fun in watching the daily rants and raves - but the organization is using him way out of the context of an announcer -It's like he's some sort of weird Pied Piper that is going to lead all White Sox fans to "a better world".......

rdivaldi
02-06-2004, 11:30 AM
If he only acted as the announcer I would agree there would be a certain amount of fun in watching the daily rants and raves - but the organization is using him way out of the context of an announcer -It's like he's some sort of weird Pied Piper that is going to lead all White Sox fans to "a better world".......

Sound like a familiar strategy?

voodoochile
02-06-2004, 11:32 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
You're exaggerating as well. Saying they blamed the media and the fans is a misinterpretation to what was actually said.

Which time? How can something that has been repeated often through the years in one form or another be considered a misrepresentation?

voodoochile
02-06-2004, 11:36 AM
Originally posted by rdivaldi
Speaking of delusional, you'd have to be to think that the Flubbie games being on WGN, having that beloved drunk announcer rant on and on about the beautiful ballpark, and being owned by the biggest media outlet in the city didn't have a major role in the Flubbie takeover in the 80's.

While the media isn't soley responsible for the inequities in the two teams public image, it played a very major role...

Um, the flubbies didn't take over the city in the 80's. The Sox held the single season Chicago attendance record until last year and the two teams were basically even on attendance until 1998 for the most part.

Your implication that this all a wonderful job done by the flubbies and their media ownership belittles the obvious PR mistakes that have been made by the Sox in the past 15 years.

Are the managment supporters claiming that the WFT, Hawkish behavior during the strike, repeated slams at the fans and media have had no effect on attendance?

How does that jibe with the attendance figures from the early 90's?

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 11:37 AM
Originally posted by rdivaldi
Sound like a familiar strategy?

No.

I know that somebody (I don't know if it's you or not) keeps pointing out Harry Caray up on the northside, but I don't quite see the corrolation. Harry Caray - not just on the northside, but at Comiskey as well, was an incredibly popular and outspoken announcer - but he never strayed away from the "fan with a microphone" concept that I think I mentioned a few posts ago. He was marketed by both the Cubs and the White Sox - but not as some sort of baseball expert or quasi-front office guy - he was marketed as a great personality, and great announcer.

What the White Sox are trying to do with Harrelson is way different.

voodoochile
02-06-2004, 11:42 AM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
What the White Sox are trying to do with Harrelson is way different.

Yep. They actually think he knows what he is talking about or at least they are willing to give that impression to the masses. As if his stint as GM didn't put the lie to that concept...

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 11:43 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Which time? How can something that has been repeated often through the years in one form or another be considered a misrepresentation?

The Sox never flat out said to come to the park and only then will we raise the payroll. KW said, I hope and believe that the SOx will play to a level where the fans will want to come out to support them. What's wrong with that? He put it on the team, not the fans. Then it got all spinned out that he said the fans need to come out and it's on them. Mistinterpretation.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 11:43 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Yep. They actually think he knows what he is talking about or at least they are willing to give that impression to the masses. As if his stint as GM didn't put the lie to that concept...

BINGO!

That's what got me so disgusted about this. Anybody over the age of 25 or so has already lived through this guy's expertise .

voodoochile
02-06-2004, 11:46 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
The Sox never flat out said to come to the park and only then will we raise the payroll. KW said, I hope and believe that the SOx will play to a level where the fans will want to come out to support them. What's wrong with that? He put it on the team, not the fans. Then it got all spinned out that he said the fans need to come out and it's on them. Mistinterpretation.

I wasn't even referring to that comment. I was referring to the ones that have blamed the fans in the past (JR after the Sox won in 2000 gloating about the WFT. The WFT (we'd have to be crazy to believe we can catch Cleveland), etc.)

You act like all they did was say, "Come out and we will spend like crazy" and then only once. History is something that goes back forever, not just until last Tuesday...

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 11:47 AM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
BINGO!

That's what got me so disgusted about this. Anybody over the age of 25 or so has already lived through this guy's expertise .

He's not trying to be a GM. That stint doesn't prove he doesn't know baseball. In fact he is very knowledgable about the game. Being a GM is different, and he gives KW credit for doing a good job under difficult circumstances. Why slam him because he's a fan. He's entitled to his opinion as well, even if it differs from you.

rdivaldi
02-06-2004, 11:48 AM
Um, the flubbies didn't take over the city in the 80's. The Sox held the single season Chicago attendance record until last year and the two teams were basically even on attendance until 1998 for the most part.

Your implication that this all a wonderful job done by the flubbies and their media ownership belittles the obvious PR mistakes that have been made by the Sox in the past 15 years.

Are the managment supporters claiming that the WFT, Hawkish behavior during the strike, repeated slams at the fans and media have had no effect on attendance?

How does that jibe with the attendance figures from the early 90's?

Oh let's not fool ourselves. In the 90's we had a brand new ballpark that everyone wanted to see, and we were one of the elite teams in baseball. Things were all good.

On the wrong side of town however, the Flubs were drawing 2+ million fans per year with losing teams, something we still are not able to do. You can see a gradual upward slope in attendance regardless of the team's performance.

rdivaldi
02-06-2004, 11:51 AM
No.

I know that somebody (I don't know if it's you or not) keeps pointing out Harry Caray up on the northside, but I don't quite see the corrolation. Harry Caray - not just on the northside, but at Comiskey as well, was an incredibly popular and outspoken announcer - but he never strayed away from the "fan with a microphone" concept that I think I mentioned a few posts ago. He was marketed by both the Cubs and the White Sox - but not as some sort of baseball expert or quasi-front office guy - he was marketed as a great personality, and great announcer.

What the White Sox are trying to do with Harrelson is way different.

The methods might be different, but the general idea is the same. Put your announcer in the limelight, have him speak for the fans and the organization, and generate publicity...

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 11:53 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
He's not trying to be a GM. That stint doesn't prove he doesn't know baseball. In fact he is very knowledgable about the game. Being a GM is different, and he gives KW credit for doing a good job under difficult circumstances. Why slam him because he's a fan. He's entitled to his opinion as well, even if it differs from you.

Who is slamming him because he's a fan? If he were "a fan" he wouldn't be sitting next to Kenny Williams talking about how Ordonez is leaving no matter what. Do all fans get to do that? If you can't see that his role in this organization is odd and ill-fated then I don't know what to tell you.

You seem to think that I'm intolerable of differing opinions. I assure you that I'm not. But let me tell you this, when somebody wants to stand in the mid-day sun and declare that it's his opinion that it is midnight, I will be the first one to point out what a moron I think that person is.

voodoochile
02-06-2004, 11:56 AM
Originally posted by rdivaldi
Oh let's not fool ourselves. In the 90's we had a brand new ballpark that everyone wanted to see, and we were one of the elite teams in baseball. Things were all good.

On the wrong side of town however, the Flubs were drawing 2+ fans per year with losing teams, something we still are not able to do. You can see a gradual upward slope in attendance regardless of the team's performance.

The flubbies started to draw well after making the playoffs in 1984 and 1989 (details, details) The Sox were outdrawing them with the new stadium and a solid team that was close to making the playoffs every year. Then came 1994 and the next year EVERY team in the majors had a down year. The Sox recovered a little in 1995 and 1996 and then came the WFT. Now check the attendance figures for 1998 and 1999 and then get back to me. Those 1.3M total yearly figures aren't because of Harry and the flubbies. You can keep spinning it that way if you want to, but the Sox made their own bed for the most part. Yes, the flubbies have had a great marketing campaign these past 15 years to actively grab baseball fans (shocking that a business would try to make itself more appealing, I know.) But, the Sox at the same time were actively destroying the good will they had with Sox fans.

It is probably a combination of the two events happening at the same time, but how can you claim the Sox aren't at least PARTLY responsible for the problems that confront them?

Maybe it is 70% aggressive flubbie marketing and 30% Sox front office, but still that is 30% of the problem, no?

I mean come on. This management teams is NOT defensible, not even close. They suck. They stink. They are the absolute worst at doing their jobs. It starts with JR and his big fat mouth and rolls right down hill through all of the people who are unproven or down right bad at their jobs. The next time this team hires a proven front office mind in ANY capacity will be the first, IMO...

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 11:56 AM
Originally posted by rdivaldi
The methods might be different, but the general idea is the same. Put your announcer in the limelight, have him speak for the fans and the organization, and generate publicity...

I don't ever remember Harry Caray speaking for the White Sox or Cubs in any capacity whatsoever officially condoned by those organizations. Never - ever - did Harry Caray assume a quasi-front office role for any team he announced.

joecrede
02-06-2004, 11:57 AM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
No.

I know that somebody (I don't know if it's you or not) keeps pointing out Harry Caray up on the northside, but I don't quite see the corrolation. Harry Caray - not just on the northside, but at Comiskey as well, was an incredibly popular and outspoken announcer - but he never strayed away from the "fan with a microphone" concept that I think I mentioned a few posts ago. He was marketed by both the Cubs and the White Sox - but not as some sort of baseball expert or quasi-front office guy - he was marketed as a great personality, and great announcer.

What the White Sox are trying to do with Harrelson is way different.

When Caray was with the Cubs, particularly when he appeared at their conventions, he often defended team management.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 12:02 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
When Caray was with the Cubs, particularly when he appeared at their conventions, he often defended team management.

Okay. Was he sitting up front with Dallas Green, and answering questions regarding Rick Sutcliffe's contract? Please - I am speaking to the degree that the White Sox are weirdly using Harrelson. Harrelson is starting smack of outright manipulation every time he opens his mouth these days. To sit here and say that "Harry Caray used to say nice things about Rollie Hemond" doesn't mean anything. A car has wheels, a bike has wheels - they are not the same thing.

poorme
02-06-2004, 12:08 PM
Harry Caray was a salesman, but he would criticize the team too, something Hawk never does.

joecrede
02-06-2004, 12:11 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Okay. Was he sitting up front with Dallas Green, and answering questions regarding Rick Sutcliffe's contract? Please - I am speaking to the degree that the White Sox are weirdly using Harrelson. Harrelson is starting smack of outright manipulation every time he opens his mouth these days. To sit here and say that "Harry Caray used to say nice things about Rollie Hemond" doesn't mean anything. A car has wheels, a bike has wheels - they are not the same thing.

Harrelson said Ordonez won't be back. What should he have said?

joecrede
02-06-2004, 12:15 PM
Originally posted by poorme
Harry Caray was a salesman, but he would criticize the team too, something Hawk never does.

Caray was no different than Harrelson. Self-promoters.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 12:16 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Harrelson said Ordonez won't be back. What should he have said?

Something like:

:hawk

"Oh I don't know. It's a different environment in today's game than it was thirty years ago - but one thing remains constant, that question should be answered by Kenny Williams - and I'm not sure he'd be able to tell you with any certainty. Why don't you take it Kenny..."

voodoochile
02-06-2004, 12:17 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Caray was no different than Harrelson. Self-promoters.

What's your point? Aren't all members of the entertainment industry the same way?

PaleHoseGeorge
02-06-2004, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by poorme
Harry Caray was a salesman, but he would criticize the team too, something Hawk never does.

Hawk is very subtle about how he criticizes the Sox. He says *nothing* and leaves dead air to speak volumes. For example, whenever Ray Durham swung at ball four, or Willie Harris failed to make contact with a runner on, or Aaron Rowand attempted to lay down a bunt but skied the ball so badly that the rightfielder broke in on it... Hawk said nothing, for roughly 10 seconds or so.

I would be willing to give Hawk props for not criticizing the team but now he says he is going to call out the media for saying negative things. He is asking for trouble if he is foolish enough to carry out this threat.

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 12:21 PM
Originally posted by poorme
Harry Caray was a salesman, but he would criticize the team too, something Hawk never does.

Not true, Hawk has had planty of comments about the club. Everyone just seems to ignore it because it fits their arguments.

poorme
02-06-2004, 12:23 PM
Yeah, he criticizes people after they are gone.

Why can't he just say, "Boy, Aaron really misjudged that one?" Why the cryptic silence? It's actually kind of weird.

voodoochile
02-06-2004, 12:28 PM
Originally posted by poorme
Yeah, he criticizes people after they are gone.

Why can't he just say, "Boy, Aaron really misjudged that one?" Why the cryptic silence? It's actually kind of weird.

That's exactly the point. Hawk won't say anything bad - especially about the young kids - because is spouting the company line. He hypes prospects. The fan listen to him and go, "Wow so and so is going to be great, who cares if we lose the AS caliber player who currently is filling that slot." Then it happens and the kid is a bust and Hawk just sits there. He did his job - making JR look like he cares about winning.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 12:29 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Hawk is very subtle about how he criticizes the Sox. He says *nothing* and leaves dead air to speak volumes. For example, whenever Ray Durham swung at ball four, or Willie Harris failed to make contact with a runner on, or Aaron Rowand attempted to lay down a bunt but skied the ball so badly that the rightfielder broke in on it... Hawk said nothing, for roughly 10 seconds or so.

I would be willing to give Hawk props for not criticizing the team but now he says he is going to call out the media for saying negative things. He is asking for trouble if he is foolish enough to carry out this threat.

I agree that Harrelson's moments of silence are obvious critical displays of disgust/anger at something which just took place on the field. No problem if that's the way he wants to express himself.

Where I have a problem - and this does not necessarily refer to Harrelson - is when somebody uses silence as a means for plausible denial such as later stating - "Hey I never said anything was wrong." Again I don't think this applies to Harrelson - but it does to a lot of giys I've worked with over the years.

PaleHoseGeorge
02-06-2004, 12:29 PM
Originally posted by poorme
Yeah, he criticizes people after they are gone.

Why can't he just say, "Boy, Aaron really misjudged that one?" Why the cryptic silence? It's actually kind of weird.


Oh! Oh! Oh! <waves arm in air frantically>

I can answer that one!

Hawk can't say a single negative word about *any* current Sox ballplayer because he is Jerry Reinsdorf's personal shill. It's not written anywhere in his job description, but it is his single-most important qualification for the job of Sox TV play-by-play man.

:reinsy
"Hawk speaks and you can't even see my lips move!"

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 12:33 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Oh! Oh! Oh! <waves arm in air frantically>

I can answer that one!

Hawk can't say a single negative word about *any* current Sox ballplayer because he is Jerry Reinsdorf's personal shill. It's not written anywhere in his job description, but it is his single-most important qualification for the job of Sox TV play-by-play man.

:reinsy
"Hawk speaks and you can't even see my lips move!"

LOL.

Palehose13
02-06-2004, 12:40 PM
Originally posted by poorme
Yeah, he criticizes people after they are gone.

Why can't he just say, "Boy, Aaron really misjudged that one?" Why the cryptic silence? It's actually kind of weird.

I do believe he will say when people misjudge balls, or when they should have advanced (example) "C. Lee should be standing on thrid right now." It think he does point out when players make mistakes, "He just swung at ball four." I think his "silent moments" are when he is really pissed and would have to be censored for saying what he wants to say.

mantis1212
02-06-2004, 12:52 PM
Originally posted by Palehose13
I do believe he will say when people misjudge balls, or when they should have advanced (example) "C. Lee should be standing on thrid right now." It think he does point out when players make mistakes, "He just swung at ball four." I think his "silent moments" are when he is really pissed and would have to be censored for saying what he wants to say.

LOL I can remember a long silent moment- the last 2 weeks of last season!

Maximo
02-06-2004, 01:15 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Yep. They actually think he knows what he is talking about or at least they are willing to give that impression to the masses. As if his stint as GM didn't put the lie to that concept...

Ditto!! I mean Pudge Fisk in leftfield? What was that all about?

Then after his failures as GM, ownership allows him to go back into the broadcast booth.

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 01:55 PM
Originally posted by Maximo
Ditto!! I mean Pudge Fisk in leftfield? What was that all about?

Then after his failures as GM, ownership allows him to go back into the broadcast booth.

How does him not being a good GM have anything to do with broadcasting? The deal with Pudge was explained at the Fest. Pudge wanted to try it, and it didn't work out, so they took him out. Is it that big of a blunder? It's not like they kept him there.

Palehose13
02-06-2004, 01:59 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
How does him not being a good GM have anything to do with broadcasting? The deal with Pudge was explained at the Fest. Pudge wanted to try it, and it didn't work out, so they took him out. Is it that big of a blunder? It's not like they kept him there.
And it isn't so far-fetched that a catcher who is up in years decides to move to (or try) another position.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 02:13 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
How does him not being a good GM have anything to do with broadcasting? The deal with Pudge was explained at the Fest. Pudge wanted to try it, and it didn't work out, so they took him out. Is it that big of a blunder? It's not like they kept him there.

Being a lousy GM has nothing to do with broadcasting, it has everything to do with portraying yourself - or being accepted - as some sort of knowledgable baseball swami.

As far as what was explained at the Fest, as far as my memory serves me - Fisk fought the idea. I clearly remember it being an issue between Harrelson and Fisk. If I am not remembering this correctly - somebody let me know, but please don't base it on what was said at SoxFest. Revisionists abound in the organization.

poorme
02-06-2004, 02:24 PM
As I recall, Fisk was asked and he grudgingly agreed to try it.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 02:26 PM
Originally posted by poorme
As I recall, Fisk was asked and he grudgingly agreed to try it.

So I'm not crazy after all............now if I could just get my wife to realize that.

joecrede
02-06-2004, 02:31 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Something like:

"Oh I don't know. It's a different environment in today's game than it was thirty years ago - but one thing remains constant, that question should be answered by Kenny Williams - and I'm not sure he'd be able to tell you with any certainty. Why don't you take it Kenny..."

That's a reasonable enough answer. I just fail to see what was so wrong about the answer he gave.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 02:36 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
That's a reasonable enough answer. I just fail to see what was so wrong about the answer he gave.

The answer he gave implied front office empowerment and knowledge. Now either his ego is running away with him and he's starting to think that he decides things for the White Sox organization, or he has been empowered by the front office to handle such issues with "the masses". The fact that he was sitting in with Williams and Guillen during the Q&A tells me that it's the latter scenario (although the first scenario is what got him canned in Boston).

Palehose13
02-06-2004, 02:37 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
That's a reasonable enough answer. I just fail to see what was so wrong about the answer he gave.
I don't know if this is the case, but I imagine that it is possible that Hawk was told by Maggs himself that he wanted to test the free agent market. If he got that straight from the horses mouth, is it so bad that he said it? We complain that the organization doesn't tell us anything, then we complain when they do talk...some people are never happy.

joecrede
02-06-2004, 02:39 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Caray was no different than Harrelson. Self-promoters.

Originally posted by voodoochile
What's your point? Aren't all members of the entertainment industry the same way?

Point is, to think Caray was not a shill compared to Harrelson because Caray "spoke his mind" is silly. Caray, like Harrelson, knew what he could get away with saying during a broadcast and what he could not.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 02:40 PM
Originally posted by Palehose13
I don't know if this is the case, but I imagine that it is possible that Hawk was told by Maggs himself that he wanted to test the free agent market. If he got that straight from the horses mouth, is it so bad that he said it? We complain that the organization doesn't tell us anything, then we complain when they do talk...some people are never happy.

Keep in mind that your scenario exists only within your imagination. I have never seen or heard anything at all that would support it.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 02:46 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Point is, to think Caray was not a shill compared to Harrelson because Caray "spoke his mind" is silly. Caray, like Harrelson, knew what he could get away with saying during a broadcast and what he could not.

I don't want to speak for voodoochile so I won't.

Harry Caray was put on a delay by John Allyn in the early 70's because Allyn was getting worried over the criticisms coming from the broadcast booth. Caray's sidekick (IIRC his last name was Waller) was fired by management after being too critical at the end of a season. Caray was not invited back by Reinsdorf for these exact same reasons, and Reinsdorf himself saw to it that Piersall was fired from his studio job for being critical. When Harry Caray moved over to the Cubs - he cut back on his criticisms, but only slightly. It was after he had his stroke that he became almost a totally different announcer (and not a very good one in my mind). There is no comparison between these two.

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 03:09 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Keep in mind that your scenario exists only within your imagination. I have never seen or heard anything at all that would support it.

That doesn't make it not so.

joecrede
02-06-2004, 03:10 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
I don't want to speak for voodoochile so I won't.

Harry Caray was put on a delay by John Allyn in the early 70's because Allyn was getting worried over the criticisms coming from the broadcast booth. Caray's sidekick (IIRC his last name was Waller) was fired by management after being too critical at the end of a season. Caray was not invited back by Reinsdorf for these exact same reasons, and Reinsdorf himself saw to it that Piersall was fired from his studio job for being critical. When Harry Caray moved over to the Cubs - he cut back on his criticisms, but only slightly. It was after he had his stroke that he became almost a totally different announcer (and not a very good one in my mind). There is no comparison between these two.

Caray was able to get it away with being critical because Veeck and Allyn figured the benefits of having Caray as a broadcaster outweighed the negative effects of his criticism of the product. (Reinsdorf didn't share that view.) Caray knew that and had carte blanche to say whatever he wanted.

I disagree with your point that Caray only slightly curbed his criticisms when he moved north. He was a warm & fuzzy broadcaster the second he stepped into their booth.

Palehose13
02-06-2004, 03:13 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Keep in mind that your scenario exists only within your imagination. I have never seen or heard anything at all that would support it.
Well, I did say that I didn't know if it was the case. However, I think it is a very real possibility. I haven't seen or heard anything to disprove it.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 03:17 PM
Originally posted by Palehose13
Well, I did say that I didn't know if it was the case. However, I think it is a very real possibility. I haven't seen or heard anything to disprove it.

You're kidding right?

The onus is on you to back up your assertion - it is not on anybody else to prove it's wrong. How would one - exactly - go about proving something didn't happen?

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 03:18 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
That doesn't make it not so.

Given this logic, there is an infinite universe of possibilities all of which need to be proven wrong until we get to the correct answer. Sorry - that's not the way it works.

Palehose13
02-06-2004, 03:22 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
You're kidding right?

The onus is on you to back up your assertion - it is not on anybody else to prove it's wrong. How would one - exactly - go about proving something didn't happen?
I didn't say that it did happen, I just stated that it was a possibility. No one knows except Hawk where he got his information. Many people are quick to assume and jump to conclusions when the answers aren't out there. I am simply throwing out a possibility.

Palehose13
02-06-2004, 03:24 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Given this logic, there is an infinite universe of possibilities all of which need to be proven wrong until we get to the correct answer. Sorry - that's not the way it works.
Isn't that the way science works? It is usually more valid to prove something didn't work than to prove that it did.

voodoochile
02-06-2004, 03:26 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Point is, to think Caray was not a shill compared to Harrelson because Caray "spoke his mind" is silly. Caray, like Harrelson, knew what he could get away with saying during a broadcast and what he could not.

Which is partly why Harry left and Sox fans got the Hawk.

voodoochile
02-06-2004, 03:31 PM
Originally posted by Palehose13
I didn't say that it did happen, I just stated that it was a possibility. No one knows except Hawk where he got his information. Many people are quick to assume and jump to conclusions when the answers aren't out there. I am simply throwing out a possibility.

Here's another possiblity. Hawk made it up.

Here's another possiblity: KW told Hawk that Maggs was gone via FA, period and Hawk interpreted that to mean that Maggs wanted to be gone.

Here's another possiblity: The Sox are distancing themselves from Maggs because they don't want to pay him and they told Hawk what to say or lied to him who passed it along.

When exactly was Maggs supposed to pass this info on to Hawk? Are they such good buddies that they talk during the off season? Did Hawk just get mad and call Maggs to try and pin him down and Maggs actually said it and then Maggs realized what an ass he sounded like so he made the public statement to counter balance the possible problems?

Man, conspiracy theorys are hard. How do you guys do it? :D:

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 03:31 PM
Originally posted by Palehose13
I didn't say that it did happen, I just stated that it was a possibility. No one knows except Hawk where he got his information. Many people are quick to assume and jump to conclusions when the answers aren't out there. I am simply throwing out a possibility.

That's fine, but I think the context of the discussion was whether or not it was (or should be) within the job description of Ken Harrelson to take on a psuedo-front office role in the organization. It wasn't about the source of his information. I think you're saying that if the source of his information was Ordonez himself, then Harrelson is right in answering the question as he did. I disagree, even if Ordonez were to send Harrelson a telegram saying he didn't want to come back to the White Sox - it is not Harrelson's place to be up on a stage with the rest of the front office answering questions like that.

Now back to his source of info. The fact that Ordonez is now saying out of Venezuela that he would love to re-up with the White Sox (albeit at a high price) for six or seven more years.....doesn't that cast a little shadow over Harrelson's answer at SoxFest?

:hawk

"I think if we were able to land a spaceship full of Twinkies on Jupiter, and then mix them with iced tea - well DJ - I think that would solve global warming?"

:DJ

"How the hell would that solve global warming?"

:hawk

"Well.................you show me how it wouldn't..........Mercy..........I've fixed another problem."

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 03:36 PM
Originally posted by Palehose13
Isn't that the way science works? It is usually more valid to prove something didn't work than to prove that it did.

No it not how science works. The scientific method is about making something work, and then verifying it's result by being able to repeat it. (With apologies to all science teachers out there because I'm pretty sure I didn't get that part just right).

Are you seriously contending that just because something hasn't been proven false - it exists as a possibility? See my last post. If I were to contend that sending Twinkies to The Crab Nebula were going to solve global warming, in your world there would be no way to prove me wrong.

You have got to be pulling my chain now.

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 03:37 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
That's fine, but I think the context of the discussion was whether or not it was (or should be) within the job description of Ken Harrelson to take on a psuedo-front office role in the organization. It wasn't about the source of his information. I think you're saying that if the source of his information was Ordonez himself, then Harrelson is right in answering the question as he did. I disagree, even if Ordonez were to send Harrelson a telegram saying he didn't want to come back to the White Sox - it is not Harrelson's place to be up on a stage with the rest of the front office answering questions like that.

Now back to his source of info. The fact that Ordonez is now saying out of Venezuela that he would love to re-up with the White Sox (albeit at a high price) for six or seven more years.....doesn't that cast a little shadow over Harrelson's answer at SoxFest?

:hawk

"I think if we were able to land a spaceship full of Twinkies on Jupiter, and then mix them with iced tea - well DJ - I think that would solve global warming?"

:DJ

"How the hell would that solve global warming?"

:hawk

"Well.................you show me how it wouldn't..........Mercy..........I've fixed another problem."

No, Hawk gave his opinion. There isn't anything wrong with it.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 03:45 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
No, Hawk gave his opinion. There isn't anything wrong with it.

If the opinion he was giving was about his favorite color, you're correct - there is nothing wrong with it. He has his favorite color, you have your's, I have mine. To argue over it would be ridiculous and wrong.

Now when you start having opinions about events and such - you start meandering away from the "Hey it's my opinion" zone, and into the "You'd better be able to back it up" zone, especially if you want to hold yourself out as an expert in the field.

It now appears what Harrelson said concerning Ordonez's desires to leave the White Sox is not shared by Ordonez. It is at this point that Harrelson starts losing a little something known as "credibility". Credibility is that thing that you build on by being correct with your opinions (and thereby becoming an expert), or you lose by being wrong with your opinions (and thereby becoming a doofus).

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 03:49 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
If the opinion he was giving was about his favorite color, you're correct - there is nothing wrong with it. He has his favorite color, you have your's, I have mine. To argue over it would be ridiculous and wrong.

Now when you start having opinions about events and such - you start meandering away from the "Hey it's my opinion" zone, and into the "You'd better be able to back it up" zone, especially if you want to hold yourself out as an expert in the field.

It now appears what Harrelson said concerning Ordonez's desires to leave the White Sox is not shared by Ordonez. It is at this point that Harrelson starts losing a little something known as "credibility". Credibility is that thing that you build on by being correct with your opinions (and thereby becoming an expert), or you lose by being wrong with your opinions (and thereby becoming a doofus).

How do you know Maggs just didn't recently change his mind. You don't know. Maggs refused to negotiate all of last season and this entire offseason. He said he wanted to be an unrestricted FA. Everyone knew the scenerio and Hawk said it. So what, he didn't make a media circus of this, everyone else did. People making a big deal about it, which is flat out ridiculous. Does this affect negotiations with Maggs? No, so who really cares. The only people who care are people who hate Hawk and are just looking for something to complain about him. I'm not buying into that.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 03:56 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
How do you know Maggs just didn't recently change his mind. You don't know. Maggs refused to negotiate all of last season and this entire offseason. He said he wanted to be an unrestricted FA. Everyone knew the scenerio and Hawk said it. So what, he didn't make a media circus of this, everyone else did. People making a big deal about it, which is flat out ridiculous. Does this affect negotiations with Maggs? No, so who really cares. The only people who care are people who hate Hawk and are just looking for something to complain about him. I'm not buying into that.

Here's what both you and I KNOW:

1. Harrelson says at SoxFest that Magglio Ordonez has no intention of even negotiating to stay. Ordonez just wants to be a free agent.

2. Ordonez is quoted out of Venezuela saying he would love to stay with the White Sox.

THAT IS ALL EITHER OF US KNOW ABOUT THIS SITUATION.

You can sit up and dream trillions of explanations as to exactly how you're going to reconcile these two contrary events. You need to use your imagination because it's the only thing that allows you to reconcile this and still maintain that Harrelson is some sort of expert.

Me - I'll just keep gathering what facts I can, and I'll draw my conclusions.

:hawk

"Did I say Ordonez was intent on leaving?.............Mercy sakes alive I meant Colon."

Maximo
02-06-2004, 03:58 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
How does him not being a good GM have anything to do with broadcasting? The deal with Pudge was explained at the Fest. Pudge wanted to try it, and it didn't work out, so they took him out. Is it that big of a blunder? It's not like they kept him there.

It became a fairly big issue between Pudge and Hawk, if my memory serves me correct. In fact, Hawk inferred through the media, that Fisk could still produce offensively, but was at the stage of his career where his age was causing some shortcomings behind the plate. Pudge, although he half heartedly
agreed to give it a try, still felt strongly he made his best contributions to the team behind the plate. Pudge pretty much felt the same way until the day he "retired".

My point on the return to broadcasting is this. Regardless of the Fisk switch and how it went down, Hawk was not very good during his short stint as GM. Some would argue the harm he caused took the Sox a long time to correct. When Reinsdorf and Einhorn basically showed Harry and Jimmy "the door", they did so under the guise that they were causing damage to the welfare of this organization.

Say what you want about Carey and Piersall, and there were moments when they were hard to take, but I don't think they did any more damage from the booth than what Hawk did from the GM office. Yet, when they terminated Hawk as GM, they had no problem allowing him to return as a broadcaster.

I may be adding 2+2 and getting a different answer than you, but in my book Hawk was, is, and always will be, very grateful to Reinsdorf and Einhorn.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 04:02 PM
So it must have been Harrelson's "opinion" that it was Pudge's idea to move to left. It amazing that so many others have the "opinion" that it was Harrelson's idea.

Palehose13
02-06-2004, 04:02 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
No it not how science works. The scientific method is about making something work, and then verifying it's result by being able to repeat it. (With apologies to all science teachers out there because I'm pretty sure I didn't get that part just right).

Are you seriously contending that just because something hasn't been proven false - it exists as a possibility? See my last post. If I were to contend that sending Twinkies to The Crab Nebula were going to solve global warming, in your world there would be no way to prove me wrong.

You have got to be pulling my chain now.
Well, I am a science teacher. I will see if I can better explain what I meant...

When using the scientific method (which in fact is out dated), a hypothesis must be a reasonable explanation...or an educated guess, if you will. Your twinkie analogy wouldn't apply because of this. However, many experiments are considered valid if possibilities are eliminated. Of course you have to repeat the experiment to see if you get the same results, but if your hypothesis tests positive it doesn't necessarily mean that it is correct. There could be any number of factors or variables that were unaccounted for or unknown by the researcher. For example, a couple of guys claimed to have successfully made cold fusion work, which would solve all of our energy problems. This was a positive result. However, it has been not been able to be reproduced so the experiment is seen as invalid in the scientific world. I don't know if I am explaining this well, but anyway...

I don't think it is a conspiracy theory to think that Hawk may have talked to Maggs about his desire to test the market. I didn't say that it happened. I was throwing a theory out there. Regarding Maggs stating that he would like to return to Chicago, is it possible that he heard what was said at Soxfest and is trying to put out a fire? Or maybe that he could be using that as leverage to negotiate with other teams?

My point is that we don't know and will most likely never know the situation. However, many are assuming that it is one way only and not looking at other possibilities.

BTW...we could send twinkies to the crab nebula and when it doesn't solve global warming your hypothesis was proven incorrect validating that it doesn't work. You always have to test your hypothesis. Otherwise it is just that, a hypothesis. ;)

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 04:03 PM
Shouldn't there be some sort of tomato or something at this point?

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 04:04 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Here's what both you and I KNOW:

1. Harrelson says at SoxFest that Magglio Ordonez has no intention of even negotiating to stay. Ordonez just wants to be a free agent.

2. Ordonez is quoted out of Venezuela saying he would love to stay with the White Sox.

THAT IS ALL EITHER OF US KNOW ABOUT THIS SITUATION.

You can sit up and dream trillions of explanations as to exactly how you're going to reconcile these two contrary events. You need to use your imagination because it's the only thing that allows you to reconcile this and still maintain that Harrelson is some sort of expert.

Me - I'll just keep gathering what facts I can, and I'll draw my conclusions.

:hawk

"Did I say Ordonez was intent on leaving?.............Mercy sakes alive I meant Colon."

Hawk said Maggs has no intention of negotiating and wants to be a FA. Maggs says he'd be willing to stay with the Sox for Vlad type money or more, DEPENDING ON HOW MUCH THE MARKET DETERMINES. Sounds like to me Hawk was right. Maggs is still going to be a FA, he's just saying once he is, the Sox are still a possibilty.

voodoochile
02-06-2004, 04:05 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Shouldn't there be some sort of tomato or something at this point?

Here ya go...

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/winningugly/showerhead.GIF

voodoochile
02-06-2004, 04:07 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Hawk said Maggs has no intention of negotiating and wants to be a FA. Maggs says he'd be willing to stay with the Sox for Vlad type money or more, DEPENDING ON HOW MUCH THE MARKET DETERMINES. Sounds like to me Hawk was right. Maggs is still going to be a FA, he's just saying once he is, the Sox are still a possibilty.

Actually, no. Once Maggs actually becomes a FA, he would no longer be able to return to the Sox until 5/1 of the following season thus ending the chance he would be back.

ma-gaga
02-06-2004, 04:08 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Shouldn't there be some sort of tomato or something at this point?


Originally posted by voodoochile


Here ya go...

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/winningugly/showerhead.GIF


Dammit. Jjav has been whining and bitching that he hasn't gotten to do a tomato award yet. Man this thread is flying.

:)

Palehose13
02-06-2004, 04:08 PM
1. Harrelson says at SoxFest that Magglio Ordonez has no intention of even negotiating to stay. Ordonez just wants to be a free agent.
From what I remember, Hawk said that Magglio wanted to test the market. Someone in the audience yelled "He Gone" and Hawk, laughingly did "He gone". Hahn then said that they were going to attempt to negotiate with Maggs again this season hoping that he will change his mind.

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 04:11 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Actually, no. Once Maggs actually becomes a FA, he would no longer be able to return to the Sox until 5/1 of the following season thus ending the chance he would be back.

What? That's not true.

joecrede
02-06-2004, 04:11 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Actually, no. Once Maggs actually becomes a FA, he would no longer be able to return to the Sox until 5/1 of the following season thus ending the chance he would be back.

Not true. The Sox can negotiate with Ordonez up until the point he signs a contract as long as they offer him arbitration by the middle of January (which they assuredly would do.)

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 04:11 PM
Originally posted by Palehose13
BTW...we could send twinkies to the crab nebula and when it doesn't solve global warming your hypothesis was proven incorrect validating that it doesn't work. You always have to test your hypothesis. Otherwise it is just that, a hypothesis. ;)

But you're the one throwing out constant hypotheses - without any chance of testing them - and implying that their very existence is "wiggle room" for Reinsdorf's finger puppet.

rdivaldi
02-06-2004, 04:13 PM
Shouldn't there be some sort of tomato or something at this point?

Considering what this thread has turned into, it deserves a big lump of crap.

(and that in no way means I want to see a picture of one on here)

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 04:13 PM
Originally posted by Palehose13
From what I remember, Hawk said that Magglio wanted to test the market. Someone in the audience yelled "He Gone" and Hawk, laughingly did "He gone". Hahn then said that they were going to attempt to negotiate with Maggs again this season hoping that he will change his mind.

Do you see how people misinterpret everything. Geez, ya that's the same as what everyone is arguing. Take it from someone who was there, not Mariotti.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Do you see how people misinterpret everything. Geez, ya that's the same as what everyone is arguing. Take it from someone who was there, not Mariotti.

IIRC The Tribune had a quote of Harrelson. I don't see a misinterpretation.

Palehose13
02-06-2004, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
But you're the one throwing out constant hypotheses - without any chance of testing them - and implying that their very existence is "wiggle room" for Reinsdorf's finger puppet.
And I never claimed that is was anything more than a hypothesis, which is what everyone else is doing also. None of us (unless JR, KW, Hawk, or Maggs post) really knows what is going on. I undertand and can accept that you disagree with my hypothesis. However, why should mine be less valid than others?

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 04:17 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
IIRC The Tribune had a quote of Harrelson. I don't see a misinterpretation.

Of course you wouldn't, you weren't there.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 04:18 PM
Originally posted by Palehose13
And I never claimed that is was anything more than a hypothesis, which is what everyone else is doing also. None of us (unless JR, KW, Hawk, or Maggs post) really knows what is going on. I undertand and can accept that you disagree with my hypothesis. However, why should mine be less valid than others?

Because your's takes a big leap of faith to be believed, and doesn't track with the history of Harrelson.

Lip Man 1
02-06-2004, 04:18 PM
Folks:

A few points if I may....

Seal: Carlton Fisk NEVER approved of the move to left field. He hated it, was embarassed by it because he was so bad at it and fought to get back to where he belonged. In fact the Sox themselves brought in former MLB manager Herman Franks that season to evaluate the club and his first recommendation was to get Fisk OUT of left field.

Two other items of note during Hawk's GM time was the embarassing way the organization left Tony LaRussa hanging as manager while they openly negotiated with Billy Martin. Martin never came because George Steinbrenner insisted on getting Joe Cowley back and the 120,000 he was paying when the Sox agreed to take Neil Allen. They started talking with Martin on May 5th, by May 9th they were STILL talking while LaRussa wondered if he should even get on the plane to Cleveland. LaRussa even offered to resign but was talked out of it by Hawk who then fired him in June.

The other thing was the deal that sent Bobby Bonilla to the Pirates for Jose Deleon.

Rdivaldi: And WHO pray tell was the team that took their games OFF WGN-TV leaving that station solely to the Cubs as well as drive Harry Caray as it turned out, to the Northside? That's how the Sox created their own problems. This was not some GRAND CONSPIRACY by the Tribune Company. Please...the Sox loaded the gun and gave it to them!

King Xerxes: The announcer was Bob Waller who did Reds TV before coming to Chicago. He was fired after the 1974 season because on the last day he interviewed Chuck Tanner. Tanner didn't like the pointed questions from Waller who asked if everything was great why were the Sox in 5th place? Tanner walked off the live interview so Waller proceeded to answer those questions himself and the Sox didn't like the answers he gave.

Lip

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 04:19 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Of course you wouldn't, you weren't there.

So are you saying that the Tribune mis-quoted him? If so please give us all the correct quote.

Daver
02-06-2004, 04:21 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Actually, no. Once Maggs actually becomes a FA, he would no longer be able to return to the Sox until 5/1 of the following season thus ending the chance he would be back.

That is not exactly correct,if the Sox offer him arbitration and he refuses it he is free to negotiate with every team,including the Sox,if the Sox do not offer him arbitration,then they could not re-sign him until May of the following year.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 04:22 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
King Xerxes: The announcer was Bob Waller who did Reds TV before coming to Chicago. He was fired after the 1974 season because on the last day he interviewed Chuck Tanner. Tanner didn't like the pointed questions from Waller who asked if everything was great why were the Sox in 5th place? Tanner walked off the live interview so Waller proceeded to answer those questions himself and the Sox didn't like the answers he gave.

Lip

BOB Waller - Thanks Lip.

Now what were the names of the two cowboys that did the Falstaff commercials early in the 70's?

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 04:24 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
So are you saying that the Tribune mis-quoted him? If so please give us all the correct quote.

No, I'm saying that it's easy to misinterpret what was said because you weren't there.

voodoochile
02-06-2004, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Not true. The Sox can negotiate with Ordonez up until the point he signs a contract as long as they offer him arbitration by the middle of January (which they assuredly would do.)

My bad, I was thinking of the post arbitration thing. Whoops... brain fart...

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 04:26 PM
and it appears that the collective memory of the elder statesmen show it to be a fact that Fisk did not want to move to left field, or - at the very best - grudgingly accepted the task. That begs this question:

Who at SoxFest stated that it was Fisk's idea?

I have a guess - but I'll wait until I hear from somebody who was there.

Palehose13
02-06-2004, 04:26 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Because your's takes a big leap of faith to be believed, and doesn't track with the history of Harrelson.
It takes a big leap of faith to believe that he has talked to Maggs about his intentions? I am so wrong to think that Hawk knows the players and does talk to them? Now, I'm not saying anything about his history as a GM, what history as an announcer does he have of providing misinformation? The fact that Maggs stopped negotiations for a new contract pretty much eludes to him testing the market. I have gotten lost a little...please tell me again your take on Hawk's statement about Ordonez.

Palehose13
02-06-2004, 04:28 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
and it appears that the collective memory of the elder statesmen show it to be a fact that Fisk did not want to move to left field, or - at the very best - grudgingly accepted the task. That begs this question:

Who at SoxFest stated that it was Fisk's idea?

I have a guess - but I'll wait until I hear from somebody who was there.
I wasn't at that seminar so I have no idea what was said regarding Fisk and left field.

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 04:30 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
and it appears that the collective memory of the elder statesmen show it to be a fact that Fisk did not want to move to left field, or - at the very best - grudgingly accepted the task. That begs this question:

Who at SoxFest stated that it was Fisk's idea?

I have a guess - but I'll wait until I hear from somebody who was there.

I was there. Hawk asked Fisk if he thought he could handle the task so that he could extend his career and continue to hit well. Fisk said ya, let's do it Hawk. They tried it, it failed, they switched it. Guillen had the crowd going, doing his impression of Fisk, it was pretty funny. Hawk admitted it was a bad idea, but I don't see why he should be ridiculed for giving it a try. It could have extended his career. Fisk thought it was a good idea to try it.

Lip Man 1
02-06-2004, 04:33 PM
Sox Nut says: "Or cause the White Flag Trade in 97?
They weren't going to catch Cleveland, that team didn't know situational hitting"

With respect Sox, that's your opinion, we have no way of knowing what might have happened. The Sox may not have caught the Indians, the may have won the division, they may have tied Cleveland and had a playoff game, who knows?

Now here is what we DO know took place:

The Sox traded three pitchers when they were 3 1/2 games out with two months to play for six minor leaguers.

The result was that the Sox were lambasted with negative publicity both locally and nationally which created a firestorm of controversy and at the very least caused them embarassment.

Jerry Reinsdorf himself made this comment to the Chicago Tribune on August 1st: "It's obvious we were disappointed with the way our ballclub played this year, with our record...no question about it. We were faced with losing Alvarez and Roberto and getting nothing, as we did with Alex. Now we've added a half dozen talented young players. Two or three have a chance of being stars according to our scouts...If they're half right,we're in great shape." (and Jerry is convienently forgetting Ventura's awful injury right before the season opened and his own GM's inability or unwillingness to get someone to replace him, even though that same GM was quoted in the Chicago papers the next day that he was going to get a 3rd baseman AND another left handed bat for the bench, as contributing to the poor start / record.)

Of the six players the Sox got we KNOW (not speculating) that two never spent a day in the major leagues. That Mike Caruso was gone in two years, that Lorenzo Barcelo was on the injured list more then the active list and that none of the players EVER even made the All Star team while with the Sox.

We know that in the six seasons since the White Flag Trade the Sox average record is 83-79 with one playoff appearance and zero wins.

The media didn't cause that Sox Nut, the Sox did themselves when they threw away an opportunity to MAYBE get to the playoffs. And the Sox get to the post season as often as a Republican wins the Chicago Mayor's race. The Sox flushed that chance down the toilet then threw in a urinal cake so it wouldn't smell as bad.

With respect, that's not the media doing that.

Lip

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 04:35 PM
Originally posted by Palehose13
Now, I'm not saying anything about his history as a GM, what history as an announcer does he have of providing misinformation? The fact that Maggs stopped negotiations for a new contract pretty much eludes to him testing the market. I have gotten lost a little...please tell me again your take on Hawk's statement about Ordonez.

Here is my take on Harrelson's statement:

He is basically floating the trial balloon for the organization that Magglio Ordonez is as good as gone after this year. The reason he says it at SoxFest is so Kenny Williams can maintain plausible denial in case of fan outrage or the like.

The history of Ken Harrelson in the broadcast booth has been one rich in carrying Reinsdorf's water. This is just another example of a commercial being presented by Harrelson like it's a documentary. It gets old, it gets transparent.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 04:36 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Fisk thought it was a good idea to try it.

Not according to most.

:hawk

"Mercy...................they're not buying into my "spin".........."

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 04:38 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Here is my take on Harrelson's statement:

He is basically floating the trial balloon for the organization that Magglio Ordonez is as good as gone after this year. The reason he says it at SoxFest is so Kenny Williams can maintain plausible denial in case of fan outrage or the like.

The history of Ken Harrelson in the broadcast booth has been one rich in carrying Reinsdorf's water. This is just another example of a commercial being presented by Harrelson like it's a documentary. It gets old, it gets transparent.

That's your interpretation of Hawk. Wonder if Hawk really believes what he says. Wonder if he is genuine and really likes the Sox. Wonder if he has information that we aren't exposed to, and with that information feels the Sox are doing the best they can. Why is that an impossible scenerio?

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 04:39 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Not according to most.

:hawk

"Mercy...................they're not buying into my "spin".........."
Oh according to most. Well that settles it.

voodoochile
02-06-2004, 04:39 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
I was there. Hawk asked Fisk if he thought he could handle the task so that he could extend his career and continue to hit well. Fisk said ya, let's do it Hawk. They tried it, it failed, they switched it. Guillen had the crowd going, doing his impression of Fisk, it was pretty funny. Hawk admitted it was a bad idea, but I don't see why he should be ridiculed for giving it a try. It could have extended his career. Fisk thought it was a good idea to try it.

To be clear, you were there in 1987 or whatever at a Soxfest when this exchange took place? (Were there Soxfests back then?) Or Fisk confirmed it at this most recent Soxfest?

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 04:41 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Oh according to most. Well that settles it.

Listen dude, you come on here and try to tell a bunch of guys who lived through the debacle that Fisk thought it was a good idea - and all of this is according to Harrelson - and then everybody who remembers it comes back and says "No - I've think somebody's lying to you" and that's your response?

joecrede
02-06-2004, 04:42 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Here is my take on Harrelson's statement:

He is basically floating the trial balloon for the organization that Magglio Ordonez is as good as gone after this year. The reason he says it at SoxFest is so Kenny Williams can maintain plausible denial in case of fan outrage or the like.

The history of Ken Harrelson in the broadcast booth has been one rich in carrying Reinsdorf's water. This is just another example of a commercial being presented by Harrelson like it's a documentary. It gets old, it gets transparent.

I don't understand what is so devious about it though. Harrelson's point of view is well known.

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 04:42 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
To be clear, you were there in 1987 or whatever at a Soxfest when this exchange took place? (Were there Soxfests back then?) Or Fisk confirmed it at this most recent Soxfest?

If I'm wrong find a Pudge quote that disputes me.

Palehose13
02-06-2004, 04:42 PM
He is basically floating the trial balloon for the organization that Magglio Ordonez is as good as gone after this year. The reason he says it at SoxFest is so Kenny Williams can maintain plausible denial in case of fan outrage or the like.
I can buy your explanation also. I am open to possibilities that is why I threw another one out there. I am not sure which to believe, but I like looking at all the possibilities before I decide.

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Listen dude, you come on here and try to tell a bunch of guys who lived through the debacle that Fisk thought it was a good idea - and all of this is according to Harrelson - and then everybody who remembers it comes back and says "No - I've think somebody's lying to you" and that's your response?

Ya, when someone says I THINK someones lying to you, I usually go with my own opinion.

voodoochile
02-06-2004, 04:47 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
If I'm wrong find a Pudge quote that disputes me.

I see, that wasn't an actual replay of events, but pure speculation on your part. The common wisdom is that Pudge hated the move and that Hawk forced it.

I have never read otherwise until this moment to be honest with you.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 04:48 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
If I'm wrong find a Pudge quote that disputes me.

Again - you're the one making the assertion that doesn't fit in with what everybody remembers. You need to show us a quote from Fisk saying he thought it was a good idea.

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 04:50 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
I see, that wasn't an actual replay of events, but pure speculation on your part. The common wisdom is that Pudge hated the move and that Hawk forced it.

I have never read otherwise until this moment to be honest with you.

No, it was a discussion at Sox Fest. The scenerio was briefly laid out and the feelings expressed. I said if it you feel that it was lie and Pudge was really upset about it, prove it. Why should I accept your recollection from 1987, when I can take it from someone who was there. If it's wrong simply present the facts proving your case. I'm not mocking you, I just would like proof of why you believe otherwise.

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
I don't understand what is so devious about it though. Harrelson's point of view is well known.

What is Harrelson's point of view? I hear Reinsdorf's point of view coming out of Harrelson's mouth. It's woven in and out of cutesy little stories and expert opinions - some of which are laughable if ever researched.

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 04:55 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Again - you're the one making the assertion that doesn't fit in with what everybody remembers. You need to show us a quote from Fisk saying he thought it was a good idea.

Making the assertion that doesn't fit what everyone remembers. If you don't remember it that way, that's fine. I'm not trying to convince you otherwise. I stated what was said at Sox Fest, and you said I was wrong because you don't remember it that way. I said, if you don't agree with me, show me why. Your argument is that your hearsay is more valids than Hawk's. I merely said that's unacceptable to change my opinion of the matter. I'm fine with the option of agreeing to disagree.

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 04:57 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
What is Harrelson's point of view? I hear Reinsdorf's point of view coming out of Harrelson's mouth. It's woven in and out of cutesy little stories and expert opinions - some of which are laughable if ever researched.

How do you know for a fact that Hawk doesn't reveal his true identity. How is him loving the Sox and not putting them down like many people here make him a puppet. Why is it so unrealistic that he says what he feels?

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 04:58 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Seal: Carlton Fisk NEVER approved of the move to left field. He hated it, was embarassed by it because he was so bad at it and fought to get back to where he belonged. In fact the Sox themselves brought in former MLB manager Herman Franks that season to evaluate the club and his first recommendation was to get Fisk OUT of left field.
Lip

We're not in court SEALgep. There is no jury to convince. If you want to believe what you were fed fine - go ahead. But please don't expect that to carry any weight with people who remember. I frankly don't care if you ever believe that Fisk hated the move or not - I just want to make sure that your view - which I firmly believe is wrong - does not become some sort of revisionist history.

joecrede
02-06-2004, 04:59 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
What is Harrelson's point of view? I hear Reinsdorf's point of view coming out of Harrelson's mouth. It's woven in and out of cutesy little stories and expert opinions - some of which are laughable if ever researched.

Harrelson gets paid by the White Sox.

SEALgep
02-06-2004, 05:01 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
We're not in court SEALgep. There is no jury to convince. If you want to believe what you were fed fine - go ahead. But please don't expect that to carry any weight with people who remember. I frankly don't care if you ever believe that Fisk hated the move or not - I just want to make sure that your view - which I firmly believe is wrong - does not become some sort of revisionist history.

Let's get one fact straight before we agree to disagree. I never said Pudge was happy with being in left field after it was already set and done. I said that he willingly agreed to give it a shot to help extend his career.

voodoochile
02-06-2004, 05:01 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
No, it was a discussion at Sox Fest. The scenerio was briefly laid out and the feelings expressed. I said if it you feel that it was lie and Pudge was really upset about it, prove it. Why should I accept your recollection from 1987, when I can take it from someone who was there. If it's wrong simply present the facts proving your case. I'm not mocking you, I just would like proof of why you believe otherwise.

Okay, I understand. Hawk said this at Soxfest and you are relaying his interpretation of events. Okay, no problem. I was just confused.

I don't have direct evidence either way, but I don't particularly trust Hawks word on the matter and the general concensus around Sox fans are as I stated before - Fisk hated it, Hawk pushed it. If you have a different interpretation of events, you are going to have to fight through a LOT of built in perceptions that's all.

When one of those perceptions is that Hawk is a shill for the franchise, your job becomes harder. I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree, and how we got to the Fisk situation is beyond me to be honest with you. For me the argument continues to be about the teams public personnae and a good chunk of that is Hawk himself. I don't hate Hawk like KingX does, but I don't trust him when it comes to telling me the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth in terms of the team or himself. He is a great teller of stories and I mean that both in the good and the bad way...

KingXerxes
02-06-2004, 05:05 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
How do you know for a fact that Hawk doesn't reveal his true identity. How is him loving the Sox and not putting them down like many people here make him a puppet. Why is it so unrealistic that he says what he feels?

Again - I wish to make the following point:

I would not expect an announcer to ravage his employer, they are paid by their employers to put the best possible spin on a game etc. In my opinion they do not "love" the team they broadcast for because they are sportscasting mercenaries.

Jack Brickhouse - who you may or may not remember - was a long time broadcaster. As his career moved on, he became the exclusive play-by-play television guy for the Cubs. He was an apologist from the get go. There was never anything anybody could do wrong in a Cub uniform. He also became a long running joke - even in the minds of most Cub fans I know.

We have a Jack Brickhouse who holds himself out as an expert.

PaleHoseGeorge
02-06-2004, 05:06 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
I was there. Hawk asked Fisk if he thought he could handle the task so that he could extend his career and continue to hit well. Fisk said ya, let's do it Hawk. They tried it, it failed, they switched it. Guillen had the crowd going, doing his impression of Fisk, it was pretty funny. Hawk admitted it was a bad idea, but I don't see why he should be ridiculed for giving it a try. It could have extended his career. Fisk thought it was a good idea to try it.

I can't disprove your account of Carlton Fisk's sentiments at the time Hawk had the bright idea of attempting to turn a catcher into a leftfielder (at Fisk's age this was even more improbable than trying the same stupid stunt with Josh Paul), but CLEARLY Fisk had some rather barbed remembrances of that day several years later.

Fisk in 1992...

Well, no ****. Of course he does. So did Joel Skinner. So did Ron Hassey. Hell, once they tried to make me a ********* left fielder." -Carlton Fisk's angry response to new Sox manager Gene Lamont's silly assertion that Ron Karkovice wants to be the team's #1 catcher

Facts are stubborn things.