PDA

View Full Version : Premature Dissing


Baby Fisk
03-01-2004, 05:42 PM
Come on guys, this tag is way too premature. Boo!

:fireozzie

Daver
03-01-2004, 05:51 PM
Originally posted by Baby Fisk
Come on guys, this tag is way too premature. Boo!




We like to be prepared.


:)

thepaulbowski
03-01-2004, 05:56 PM
Originally posted by Daver
We like to be prepared.


:)

I give the Sox 2 games before somebody starts a fire Guillen thread. :D:

CWSGuy406
03-01-2004, 06:00 PM
All I hope for Ozzie to do is to get the guys up for games against the Tigers, Rangers, bottom feeders of the AL. That and handle the pitching staff. Oh yeah, and get Harris to a respectable OBP. Well, and no boilovers with Big Frank.

Good Luck, Ozzie. :D:

Baby Fisk
03-01-2004, 06:03 PM
Originally posted by thepaulbowski
I give the Sox 2 games before somebody starts a fire Guillen thread. :D:
You mean ST games, don't you?

jeremyb1
03-01-2004, 06:20 PM
Originally posted by CWSGuy406
All I hope for Ozzie to do is to get the guys up for games against the Tigers, Rangers, bottom feeders of the AL. That and handle the pitching staff. Oh yeah, and get Harris to a respectable OBP. Well, and no boilovers with Big Frank.

It was known coming in that Ozzie was hired first and foremost for his ability to motivate the players and promote good team chemistry. All indications out of spring training thus far is that the team has taken to him. There have been a number of positive comments from players like Buehrle and Frank. Frank in particular has cited a number of improvements from the Manuel era in terms of the atmosphere and the manner in which Ozzie handles players in the spring.

In game strategy and an emphasis on plate discipline are not going to be Ozzie's strengths but frankly, I don't think that's worth complaining about or blaming Ozzie for because the reality is that our organization is not progressive enough to hire a manager that excels in those regards. It starts at the top.

The most Ozzie could ever realistically be expected to drastically improve on is motivating the team. You could call for his head because of poor in game strategy but even if he were fired this organization most likely won't hire anyone better as far as strategy goes so personally I fail to see the point.

HomeFish
03-01-2004, 06:24 PM
I beat you to that one...check the link in my sig. :)

Daver
03-01-2004, 06:32 PM
Originally posted by HomeFish
I beat you to that one...check the link in my sig. :)

We had members calling for Guillen to be fired before the press conference announcing his hiring was over.


:bandance:

MRKARNO
03-01-2004, 07:01 PM
Originally posted by Daver
We like to be prepared.


Ozzie's going to make you look like a fool.

Daver
03-01-2004, 07:03 PM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
Ozzie's going to make you look like a fool.

I really hope he does.

Nothing would make me happier.

Mickster
03-01-2004, 07:09 PM
Originally posted by Daver
I really hope he does.

Nothing would make me happier.

I really hope Willie makes us all look like fools. Nothing will make this board happier!

:)

Lip Man 1
03-01-2004, 08:48 PM
Jeremy says: "It was known coming in that Ozzie was hired first and foremost for his ability to motivate the players and promote good team chemistry."

No Jeremy....it was known that Ozzie was hired because he works cheap (The Sox are still paying Manager Gandhi a cool million) and perhaps sell some tickets.

Let's not confuse the facts here.

That being said he may turn out to do a good job...we'll see.

Lip

A. Cavatica
03-01-2004, 08:51 PM
I'm with Daver on this one. I would love to be wrong.

I have to say that since ST actually began, Ozzie's been fine. But there's been nothing to judge him on, except the rah-rah attitude, which everyone thinks is his strength. The tests will come when his pitching changes (or lack thereof) backfire, when his newly aggressive team runs itself out of big innings, when he plays a crazy hunch and his team starts to turn on him.

Here's what Ozzie needs to do to win me over:

1. Start fast. It doesn't matter whether they blow teams out or squeak by, but the Sox need to play well over .500 in April. I've watched too many Manuel teams give the season away early.

2. Demonstrate that he can handle a pitching staff. Manuel always tried to fit too many pitchers into a game, so we often had 12 pitchers, which is just ridiculous. I'd like to see Ozzie go out to the mound, settle down a pitcher, and leave him in there to get out of the inning.

3. Evaluate talent. He needs to fill 2 holes in the rotation, find a leadoff hitter, and find a second baseman -- for starters. I want to see him consider all his options, including rookies. I want to see his choices play well.

4. Manage aggressively, but under control. Manuel was nothing if not predictable. Ozzie needs to mix it up enough so that the other side doesn't know what's coming. For example, he could have Frank bunt if there are runners on first and second, nobody out, in the seventh inning of a scoreless tie -- but only ONCE, so that other managers would know they couldn't assume anything.

5. Discipline. I want to see players learning from their mistakes.

Realist
03-01-2004, 08:53 PM
Originally posted by Mickster
I really hope Willie makes us all look like fools. Nothing will make this board happier!

:)

Now now. When Willie busts out he won't make ALL of us look like fools. :smile:

Of course if he doesn't, I'll be a pretty much alone fool. :(:

jeremyb1
03-01-2004, 09:01 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Jeremy says: "It was known coming in that Ozzie was hired first and foremost for his ability to motivate the players and promote good team chemistry."

No Jeremy....it was known that Ozzie was hired because he works cheap (The Sox are still paying Manager Gandhi a cool million) and perhaps sell some tickets.

Let's not confuse the facts here.

That being said he may turn out to do a good job...we'll see.

Is possible and maybe even likely that you're correct about hiring Ozzie as a PR move to sell tickets but do you really feel the working cheap motive holds? First of all what candidates did we pass up that were looking for a big pay day? Unless you're Joe Torre and have a bunch of rings no manager costs that much money. Second, our budget was 57 million and our payroll stands at something like 63 million, why try to save a few hundred thousand in our manager selection?

Daver
03-01-2004, 09:30 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
First of all what candidates did we pass up that were looking for a big pay day?

Cito Gaston.

Last time I checked he won two rings as a manager.

He also has a reputation for getting the best out of the talent he has.

jabrch
03-01-2004, 09:33 PM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
Ozzie's going to make you look like a fool.


Make me look like a fool or make HIMSELF look like a fool?

CubKilla
03-01-2004, 10:14 PM
Originally posted by Daver
Cito Gaston.

Last time I checked he won two rings as a manager.

He also has a reputation for getting the best out of the talent he has.

Not to mention, he wanted guarantees that the majority of players from the '03 team would be back in '04.....

:reinsy

"Meaning I'd have to put my money where my mouth is. That's never going to happen. Remember that whole crock about giving away all 6 of my NBA Champion rings for 1 WS ring? HA! I prefer to put my money in my pockets."

jeremyb1
03-02-2004, 02:22 AM
Originally posted by CubKilla
Not to mention, he wanted guarantees that the majority of players from the '03 team would be back in '04.....

Ok. Well as far as a salary goes, I don't think Gaston was going to ask for some astronomical fee.

As far as resigning the players, that is not a move that should be related to our manager. We should not add 20 million dollars in player salaries only to attract a manager. That would be stupid. As far as I'm concerned they're completely unrelated moves. If KW had the money and felt the players would improve the team, they should've been resigned. If JR wants to up his budget 20 million he should do it but he shouldn't nor would he ever do so only to attract a manager.

Finally, do we know there's any truth to Gaston insisting on retaining the veterans? Seems like an awfully steep demand for a manager that despite his rings has been unable to land a job the last several years. Also, it was reported numerous places that Gaston was very interested in the job which wouldn't suggest he was only interested conditionally.

doublem23
03-02-2004, 05:23 AM
Originally posted by Baby Fisk
Come on guys, this tag is way too premature. Boo!



Weren't you around when it was speculated he might be named manager? The fireworks have been going off since then.