PDA

View Full Version : Daver do you still hate Ozzie and why???


mike squires
09-07-2005, 12:53 AM
???

Just curious.:redneck

fquaye149
09-07-2005, 12:59 AM
i can guess why many people don't love Ozzie as a "manager" - he isn't a very cerebral player and it's hard to peg exactly why he's doing certain things.

For instance, Jeff Brantley really wasn't wrong in criticizing him in that Buehrle game for leaving him in and bringing in Marte at the end. (he was wrong to keep bitching about it) but baseball-wise it didn't make a ton of sense.

Ozzie continues to win and for me when he makes a head-scratching move I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say "maybe there's something going on behind the scenes we don't know about," like when he doesn't play Iguchi or doesn't bring in Hermanson.

However, the really good managers in baseball don't really leave you scratching your head the way Ozzie does sometimes.

Randar68
09-07-2005, 01:06 AM
???

Just curious.:redneck

Ahhh. Not liking the hire given other options or preferences = hatred?

Nothing like simple mindedness to try to make a black and white story out of a full spectrum of colors...

mr_genius
09-07-2005, 01:07 AM
i can guess why many people don't love Ozzie as a "manager" - he isn't a very cerebral player and it's hard to peg exactly why he's doing certain things.

For instance, Jeff Brantley really wasn't wrong in criticizing him in that Buehrle game for leaving him in and bringing in Marte at the end. (he was wrong to keep bitching about it) but baseball-wise it didn't make a ton of sense.

Ozzie continues to win and for me when he makes a head-scratching move I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say "maybe there's something going on behind the scenes we don't know about," like when he doesn't play Iguchi or doesn't bring in Hermanson.

However, the really good managers in baseball don't really leave you scratching your head the way Ozzie does sometimes.

Some of Ozzies moves have been a bit puzzling at times, that being said I like him as the Sox skipper. He seems to have brought a winning attitude into the Sox dugout, worked with KW as far as what type of team the Sox should field in 05' and gives hilarious press confrences :tongue: . I also like his aggressive style as far as hit and runs, suicide/sacrafice bunts, green lights for stolen bases and so on. I wouldn't say he is a brillant strategist, more of an old school, no nonsense approach, type of manager.

TFLEM33
09-07-2005, 01:28 AM
I think Ozzie is a great manager because he is willing to take risks and will be the first to take the blame if those risks don't pan out. Nothing great ever happens in life or baseball if you play it safe. Ozzie brings so much energy to the clubhouse and is definitely a "player's manager." He does not seem to act like their superior, but rather, their friend. I think this makes the players respect him more. I questioned the move 2 years ago when Ozzie was signed, but it has turned out better than I could have possibly imagined. He has given the whole organization a huge boost. He is a good model of a Sox fan. He's not fancy; he just goes out and gets the job done. I know this wasn't supposed to be a "praise Ozzie" thread, but he deserves the praise. After all, he will soon be the 2005 AL Manager of the Year!

BlackFrancis
09-07-2005, 01:40 AM
I think Ozzie is a great manager because he is willing to take risks and will be the first to take the blame if those risks don't pan out. Nothing great ever happens in life or baseball if you play it safe. Ozzie brings so much energy to the clubhouse and is definitely a "player's manager." He does not seem to act like their superior, but rather, their friend. I think this makes the players respect him more. I questioned the move 2 years ago when Ozzie was signed, but it has turned out better than I could have possibly imagined. He has given the whole organization a huge boost. He is a good model of a Sox fan. He's not fancy; he just goes out and gets the job done. I know this wasn't supposed to be a "praise Ozzie" thread, but he deserves the praise. After all, he will soon be the 2005 AL Manager of the Year!

I agree with tflem33, and couldn't care less (yes, the term is "COULDN'T care less," not "COULD care less," as a lot of people seem to write on here) if or why you think Daver or anyone else hates Ozzie. Ozzie rules!!!

fquaye149
09-07-2005, 01:41 AM
Ahhh. Not liking the hire given other options or preferences = hatred?

Nothing like simple mindedness to try to make a black and white story out of a full spectrum of colors...

randar, daver has said on a number of occasions that he's not an ozzie fan...and does use the fire ozzie tag quite a bit.

A. Cavatica
09-07-2005, 08:01 AM
I hated the hiring. I said Ozzie had been a stupid baseball player and I expected him to be a stupid manager. I also predicted he'd fall in love with players that reminded Ozzie of himself and play them far too often for the team's good.

Well, I was wrong. It's confounding, because a lot of my predictions for Ozzie's "stupid" managing -- low OBP, poorly constructed batting orders, overly aggressive baserunning, Timo -- have come true. (And when we were on our August slide, there they were, front and center!) But Ozzie has brought a lot more to the table than I ever expected. Here are five things I like about Ozzie.

1) Energy/charisma. OK, everyone knew this would be his strength, particularly following Jerry Manuel. But I thought it would wear thin after half a season, and things have only gotten better. The players stayed loose in August, largely because Ozzie took the heat off them. And is there any other team in MLB where the manager is the public face of the team?

2) Handling of the pitching staff. I was sure he'd be a complete disaster handling pitchers, since he'd never done it before. But he lets his starters do their jobs, and (with a few notable exceptions) he sends relievers out for the appropriate length of time, without playing lefty-righty matchups compulsively. Either Ozzie's a natural handler of pitchers, or Don Cooper is a genius and Ozzie defers to him completely. Either way, you can't argue with his results.

3) Handling of the defense. Isn't it amazing to watch a championship caliber defense? Ozzie deserves full credit for building it. He told KW what kind of players he wanted, he runs them out there even if they're not hitting, he helps with positioning (see: David Ortiz, Monday). This is why our pitchers are so damn good, people.

4) Using everyone on the roster. He keeps everyone fresh, and he has faith in everyone. It drives me -- and many other posters -- up the wall, but damned if players like Timo don't come through once in a while and make Ozzie look like a genius. (Remember Kelly Dransfeldt?) We can wish we had a stronger bench, but I think Ozzie's doing a great job getting production out of them.

5) Wins.

Randar68
09-07-2005, 10:50 AM
I hated the hiring. I said Ozzie had been a stupid baseball player and I expected him to be a stupid manager. I also predicted he'd fall in love with players that reminded Ozzie of himself and play them far too often for the team's good.

Well, I was wrong. It's confounding, because a lot of my predictions for Ozzie's "stupid" managing -- low OBP, poorly constructed batting orders, overly aggressive baserunning, Timo -- have come true. (And when we were on our August slide, there they were, front and center!) But Ozzie has brought a lot more to the table than I ever expected. Here are five things I like about Ozzie.

1) Energy/charisma. OK, everyone knew this would be his strength, particularly following Jerry Manuel. But I thought it would wear thin after half a season, and things have only gotten better. The players stayed loose in August, largely because Ozzie took the heat off them. And is there any other team in MLB where the manager is the public face of the team?

2) Handling of the pitching staff. I was sure he'd be a complete disaster handling pitchers, since he'd never done it before. But he lets his starters do their jobs, and (with a few notable exceptions) he sends relievers out for the appropriate length of time, without playing lefty-righty matchups compulsively. Either Ozzie's a natural handler of pitchers, or Don Cooper is a genius and Ozzie defers to him completely. Either way, you can't argue with his results.

3) Handling of the defense. Isn't it amazing to watch a championship caliber defense? Ozzie deserves full credit for building it. He told KW what kind of players he wanted, he runs them out there even if they're not hitting, he helps with positioning (see: David Ortiz, Monday). This is why our pitchers are so damn good, people.

4) Using everyone on the roster. He keeps everyone fresh, and he has faith in everyone. It drives me -- and many other posters -- up the wall, but damned if players like Timo don't come through once in a while and make Ozzie look like a genius. (Remember Kelly Dransfeldt?) We can wish we had a stronger bench, but I think Ozzie's doing a great job getting production out of them.

5) Wins.

I agree 100%. At the time, I thought it was the wrong move due to the construction of the team and the guys in the pipeline. We were a veteran-laden team with station-to-station hitters and power but not much else and I was sure Ozzie would blow that up even if no personnel were changed.

KW did a great job of finding the pieces he could to fit Ozzie's desired style of play. The entire reason it has worked has been because the GM and Manager are 100% in-sync and have the same philosophy...

Then again, criticizing Ozzie's moves and style is just that, it still does not equate to hate, as the original poster so eloquently put it...

maurice
09-07-2005, 11:16 AM
I have only 2 major complaints:
- he sometimes uses too many relievers in a game for no legitimate reason; and
- he's in love with Timo Perez, plays him too much, and likes to bat him #1 and #5.
Otherwise, Ozzie's been great for clubhouse chemistry and sets a nice tone for a balanced team.

daveeym
09-07-2005, 11:19 AM
I also predicted he'd fall in love with players that reminded Ozzie of himself and play them far too often for the team's good.
Thats where pro sports kinda sucks and alot of good players get the shaft. Ozzie and KW went for grinders and hustlers, a lot of players usually delegated to the bench or second fiddle in pro sports. Pro sports is too often about the glitz and the glam, the 100 mph fastball and 4.0 forty rather than the smart fundamentally sound player. I mean Tom Brady has no "talent", yet he's got a few rings. This team when clicking shows how good those falling in the second category can be.

The Sox may be light on "talent" this year but they by far are the smartest baseball team to take the field on the south side in years. Very few stupid mistakes, missed signs, and showboating of arms, dingers, etc. When they're clicking and all playing team ball it's beautiful to watch.

Ozzie's definitely a players manager. However I think most of his head scratching moves are due to A. info he has and we don't and B. Long term big picture thinking. While trying to win every game, Ozzie isn't PLAYING to win every game if you feel me. The seasons too long, 10 fielders, 3 starters and 3 in the pen (you're A squad if you will) can't do it all year long by themselves.

Randar68
09-07-2005, 11:21 AM
I have only 2 major complaints:
- he sometimes uses too many relievers in a game for no legitimate reason; and
- he's in love with Timo Perez, plays him too much, and likes to bat him #1 and #5.
Otherwise, Ozzie's been great for clubhouse chemistry and sets a nice tone for a balanced team.

He overthinks the Lefty-righty matchup with his bullpen. Cotts is much better versus righties than lefties and Vizcaino is historically more successful against lefties. Yet, last night, he used both of them for a situation to match them up against what they REALLY are weaker against, just in the name of Lefty-Righty matchup...

Like I said, it's hard to argue with results, but I'm nervous about the playoffs. We run ourselves out of too many innings (*** is Widger trying to score w/ nobody out last night for?) and Ozzie goes bullpen-crazy sometimes which leaves us very short in the pen should anything happen late in the game.

RallyBowl
09-07-2005, 11:51 AM
There is no one here and no one out there who could have done a better job with this team this year. Ozzie has made "questionable" decisions, but how many depends on who's questioning him. Last I checked, only 2 people have the baseball intelligence and authority to question anything he has done this year.

:reinsy *sits in silence, counts days until World Series berth*
:KW
*chuckles to himself, wonders why people think he and Ozzie have such easy jobs. Then remembers- WE DON'T CARE*

Ol' No. 2
09-07-2005, 12:03 PM
He overthinks the Lefty-righty matchup with his bullpen. Cotts is much better versus righties than lefties and Vizcaino is historically more successful against lefties. Yet, last night, he used both of them for a situation to match them up against what they REALLY are weaker against, just in the name of Lefty-Righty matchup...

Like I said, it's hard to argue with results, but I'm nervous about the playoffs. We run ourselves out of too many innings (*** is Widger trying to score w/ nobody out last night for?) and Ozzie goes bullpen-crazy sometimes which leaves us very short in the pen should anything happen late in the game.I've heard this thing over and over about Cotts being better against righties, etc. etc. But you have to look at the hitter, too. If you have a LH hitter who is much better against a RHP, but a LHP who is better against RH hitters, how does that shake out? Who's gained the advantage? I think it's more complex than simply looking at the pitcher.

Frater Perdurabo
09-07-2005, 12:12 PM
Like I said, it's hard to argue with results, but I'm nervous about the playoffs. We run ourselves out of too many innings (*** is Widger trying to score w/ nobody out last night for?) and Ozzie goes bullpen-crazy sometimes which leaves us very short in the pen should anything happen late in the game.

I agree with Randar's analysis, but even then two things give me comfort:

1. The bullpen has not been overused precisely because Ozzie has been quick to replace one bullpen pitcher with another. He's also not stubborn with bullpen roles. When Shingo bombed, he quickly made Hermanson the closer (whereas a certain predecessor stuck with Koch). He's also developed Jenks into a pitcher who can close. Really, the Sox have a bullpen full of guys who seemingly at will can close out an inning or close out a game by inducing a K, a popup or a GIDP. The pen will be fresh for the playoffs.

2. Widger will not play in the postseason unless A.J. gets hurt or ejected.

Ozzie may be crazy, but he's crazy in a PHG/crazy like a fox kind of way. In fact, I might go so far to say that he's borderline crazy/genius in a Phil Jackson kind of way in at least one respect: Phil used to allow the Bulls to stink up the joint from time to time while he filed his nails on the bench just to prove to the players that they would not win unless they followed his coaching. Phil knew when to lay off the players and when to press them. Ozzie's the same way. He let the players bumble their way through a dismal August. I have no doubt he knew exactly how to flip the switch once the calendar turned to September.

Ozzie's favorite whipping boy is Buck Showalter, who is a micromanager, constantly plays favorites, keeps pressing the players all the time and establishes rules simply to show that "Buck is Boss." Conversely, Ozzie makes sure he's the "anti-Buck."

maurice
09-07-2005, 12:21 PM
The bullpen has not been overused precisely because Ozzie has been quick to replace one bullpen pitcher with another.

No, the BP hasn't been overused because Sox starters eat so many innings, leaving relatively few for the pen. Swapping relievers instead of leaving them in to pitch a full inning causes more wear and tear on the BP, because they make more appearances and have to warm up more often. There's no good reason to regularly use Cotts against only 1 or maybe 2 batters. He gets everybody out.

He's also not stubborn with bullpen roles. When Shingo bombed, he quickly made Hermanson the closer (whereas a certain predecessor stuck with Koch). He's also developed Jenks into a pitcher who can close.

This worked out nicely, though credit also is due to KW for picking up Hermanson and Jenks during the offseason for essentially nothing.

Frater Perdurabo
09-07-2005, 12:43 PM
No, the BP hasn't been overused because Sox starters eat so many innings, leaving relatively few for the pen.

Honestly, I didn't mention Ozzie allowing the starters to eat innings because I thought it was so obvious to everyone. (I knew it was obvious to you, anyway).
:redface::D::cool:

Baby Fisk
09-07-2005, 12:50 PM
Ozzie's favorite whipping boy is Buck Showalter, who is a micromanager, constantly plays favorites, keeps pressing the players all the time and establishes rules simply to show that "Buck is Boss." Conversely, Ozzie makes sure he's the "anti-Buck."Good comparison. Hard to see Showalter letting loose a potty-mouthed tirade either.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/mlb/1999/postseason/division_series/nl_div2/news/1999/10/08/bumbling_diamondbacks_ap/t1_showalter_ap.jpg
"Two of the teams I managed won the World Series! (one year after I was sacked from them)"

TaylorStSox
09-07-2005, 12:54 PM
Cotts against only 1 or maybe 2 batters. He gets everybody out.



Neal needs more work. He hadn't been used much in a while and he wasn't sharp last night. Politte needs a rest.

34 Inch Stick
09-07-2005, 12:55 PM
I did not like the hire. You still could not convince me that Ozzie is in the upper tier of managers. However, I like wins and that is exactly what he has given me this year. Ozzie is in that large pool of indistinguishable managers who really have very little affect on the outcomes of games. His being a player manager is great this year but may be a bad thing in future years (ala Dusty).

Jerry Manuel managed the Sox to a division championship with a team many considered overachievers. In 2003 Manuel was considered a dunce by many.

bobowhite
09-07-2005, 12:56 PM
I'm not a great fan of Ozzie (at least at the hiring) but I can't argue with his results. Some of the moves he's made have been boneheaded and I don't know why he thinks Timo is a lead-off hitter or Ozuna can play third base (that great play the other night should have been a routine one.) I think he's also overly generous with Marte.

But the players love him, play hard for him, don't showboat or do stupid stuff and he WINS.

Got to love him for that.

mdep524
09-07-2005, 12:56 PM
1. The bullpen has not been overused precisely because Ozzie has been quick to replace one bullpen pitcher with another. He's also not stubborn with bullpen roles. When Shingo bombed, he quickly made Hermanson the closer (whereas a certain predecessor stuck with Koch). He's also developed Jenks into a pitcher who can close. Really, the Sox have a bullpen full of guys who seemingly at will can close out an inning or close out a game by inducing a K, a popup or a GIDP. The pen will be fresh for the playoffs. I agree the Sox have assembled a pretty damn good bullpen (when healthy) from top to bottom, something that is NOT easy to do.

I also agree with the "Ozzie is not stubborn with bullpen roles" up to a point. His handling of Shingo this year and Koch last year was much better than comparative moves by Jerry Manuel. But... at the same time Ozzie sometimes manages the bullpen a little superficially.
-At times he overuses the whole righty/lefty match up thing.
-Damaso Marte is NOT the best man to get every lefty out with!
-Neal Cotts can handle whole innings by himself!
-El Duque should never (or very rarely) go more than 6.

Of course, bullpen management is the hardest part of the job, and the easiest to second guess. So I cut him some slack there. His use of Marte is the one thing that really makes me cringe. (As long as the rest of the league hasn't entirely caught on, he could be excellent trade bait this offseason....but that's a topic for another thread :smile: )

ChiSoxPatF
09-07-2005, 01:13 PM
When the Sox hired Ozzie, I was skeptical but willing to give him a shot since ANYONE was better than what Manuel was doing. That said, I have really liked the direction he has taken with this team. Kenny may be credited with the "Grinders" term and taken the job risks of implementing the plan but it was Ozzie that set out to define a team in this way and that lived up to this credo. Kenny gave Ozzie what he wanted and, if wins are the indicator (which they ARE), Ozzie was right.

He makes some boneheaded decisions but during the stretch of 162 games its almost impossible not to do somethings that warrant second-guessing. I'll take Ozzie with this team anyday and I'm glad he helped create a team and a mentality we can all be proud of.

ode to veeck
09-07-2005, 03:45 PM
I didn't like the hire at the time, as I wanted to see an experienced manager in the role, but I've actually liked Ozzie's managering most of the season, and think he will grow to become a lot better over time (anyone remember how a young Tony LaRussa handled pitchers the first year or two?)

He's certainly sly like a fox and really does a good job unspinning the dumbest and most leading questions from the media

MERPER
09-07-2005, 04:04 PM
First and foremost, consider the amount of time (days) Ozzie has spent in first place since first taking over as manager... if Maggs and Frank never went down last year, we very well could have won the division..

In terms of Ozzie's in-game moves, they might make you scratch your head but he knows his players and his team better than ANYONE!!! That's why he's a great manager...

I'd half to believe that having coached under Bobby Cox, Jack McKeon and Jeff Torborg... Ozzie learned some stuff.... maybe that's why he's like 30 games over .500 in 1-run games

Most importantly, he knows when he needs to be a manager/boss and a friend/teammate.... So far, he has been remarkable as a manager and could be the next great one in the game! :)

Flight #24
09-07-2005, 04:20 PM
No, the BP hasn't been overused because Sox starters eat so many innings, leaving relatively few for the pen. Swapping relievers instead of leaving them in to pitch a full inning causes more wear and tear on the BP, because they make more appearances and have to warm up more often. There's no good reason to regularly use Cotts against only 1 or maybe 2 batters. He gets everybody out.


IMO, the reason Ozzie does this is at least partially BECAUSE he's got such good starters. I.e., he knows he can play matchups more & switch guys in & out more often because he's not going to need to use them every single day with the great starting corps.

Let's also not forget that he handles his starters pretty well. These are some good starters, but between him & Coop, we're getting some pretty good improvement from the likes of Garland & Contreras and arguably from Garcia as well (looking back past his 2004 season).

IMO the Phil J comparison is apppropriate. Ozzie knows how to keep guys all fresh & contributing, and he gives guys responsibility and the ability to make mistakes as long as they play within "the system". In Phil's case that was the triangle, in Ozzie's case it's fundamental baseball.

What will be interesting is IMO you could see this team becoming something like the NFL's Patriots. Not in the sense of repeat titles (although I have my hopes!), but in the sense that they take relatively unsung players as long as they have "baseball intelligence" and completely buy into the system. They then plug them in and those guys make plays to help the team win. All the while keeping most of their resources focused on the key difference makers that matter (NE = Brady, key D players. Sox = SPs).

And the comment about it being GM & manager 100% in sync was right on.

maurice
09-07-2005, 05:42 PM
IMO, the reason Ozzie does this is at least partially BECAUSE he's got such good starters. I.e., he knows he can play matchups more & switch guys in & out more often because he's not going to need to use them every single day with the great starting corps.

I agree. I just don't share his enthusiasm for matchups, especially with the unusual makeup of this staff.

Daver
09-07-2005, 05:46 PM
I don't hate Ozzie, I think he is a lousy manager with a team that wins despite his decisions, but hate is a very strong word.

kittle42
09-07-2005, 05:56 PM
I don't hate Ozzie, I think he is a lousy manager with a team that wins despite his decisions, but hate is a very strong word.

I have to agree with Daver - if we were getting the results of the similar managing techniques of Jerry Manuel, we would be screaming for his head - so who should dthe credit go to - the players or Ozzie?

fquaye149
09-07-2005, 08:04 PM
I have to agree with Daver - if we were getting the results of the similar managing techniques of Jerry Manuel, we would be screaming for his head - so who should dthe credit go to - the players or Ozzie?

Here's the thing: we aren't.

Don't get me wrong, this is a better team than Jerry had to manage in 2002 or 2003...but I don't think we're 10-15 games better.

I don't know - I think there's two components to managing: baseball knowledge, ala Buck Showalter, Joe Torre, Jack McKeon and also "inspiration" - not like giving good speeches, per se, but getting guys to play for you.

For instance - I think Larry Bowa and Bobby Valentine might know a good deal more about the game of baseball...but people pretty much dislike playing for them. They're like "**** this guy."

Ozzie is a player's manager for the most part, without being a pushover. I think that's part of his managerial skills that's too often overlooked - his players generally like playing for him, get along with him, but he holds everyone accountable for their mistakes (and heck...when he does something he thinks is wrong in retrospect he owns up to it a lot of the time - says "i screwed up")

You didn't see JM doing any of the latter things Ozzie does...just make the same baseball knowledge mistakes Ozzie does without having good chemistry.

Daver
09-07-2005, 08:15 PM
Here's the thing: we aren't.

Don't get me wrong, this is a better team than Jerry had to manage in 2002 or 2003...but I don't think we're 10-15 games better.

I don't know - I think there's two components to managing: baseball knowledge, ala Buck Showalter, Joe Torre, Jack McKeon and also "inspiration" - not like giving good speeches, per se, but getting guys to play for you.

For instance - I think Larry Bowa and Bobby Valentine might know a good deal more about the game of baseball...but people pretty much dislike playing for them. They're like "**** this guy."

Ozzie is a player's manager for the most part, without being a pushover. I think that's part of his managerial skills that's too often overlooked - his players generally like playing for him, get along with him, but he holds everyone accountable for their mistakes (and heck...when he does something he thinks is wrong in retrospect he owns up to it a lot of the time - says "i screwed up")

You didn't see JM doing any of the latter things Ozzie does...just make the same baseball knowledge mistakes Ozzie does without having good chemistry.

Players liked playing for Valentine, his problem was the fact that he was a goof that made worse decisions than even Ozzie does.

Joe Torre and Jack McKeon are among the top managers in all of baseball, because they combine good decision making with getting a team to play for them. Ozzie would have benefitted a lot by spending another season or two under Trader Jack's tutorship.

Brian26
09-07-2005, 08:26 PM
Here's the thing: we aren't.

Don't get me wrong, this is a better team than Jerry had to manage in 2002 or 2003...but I don't think we're 10-15 games better.

This team is easily 15 games better than the 2002 squad. It starts and ends with the starting pitching:

2005: Buehrle, Garcia, Garland, Contreras, Duque

2002: Buehrle, Ritchie, Biddle, Wright, Garland circa 2002

Did I miss anyone on that 2002 starting staff? I mean, seriously, it's not even close. That's easily a 15-game spread, and I haven't even taken into account our more balanced offensive attack versus the station-to-station juggernaut of the Sox earlier this decade. This team wins despite Ozzie.

fquaye149
09-07-2005, 09:12 PM
This team is easily 15 games better than the 2002 squad. It starts and ends with the starting pitching:

2005: Buehrle, Garcia, Garland, Contreras, Duque

2002: Buehrle, Ritchie, Biddle, Wright, Garland circa 2002

Did I miss anyone on that 2002 starting staff? I mean, seriously, it's not even close. That's easily a 15-game spread, and I haven't even taken into account our more balanced offensive attack versus the station-to-station juggernaut of the Sox earlier this decade. This team wins despite Ozzie.

I mean, starting pitching is huge...but the 2002 team had arguably a better bullpen and a much better lineup. Not that that should make up all the way, but 15 games better?

Meanwhile, the 2003 pitching staff was worse than ours, but definitely not 15 games worse, all the while our lineup was light years beyond this year's. I mean, heck the 2003 Loaiza would be running away with the Cy Young if he were pitching this year. Meanwhile Colon and Buehrle were par for their course, Garland was a fine 4th starter...and although the fifth starter fiasco was awful, it didn't mean 15 games.

All I'm saying is that

a.) Manuel didn't do anything with some decent teams

and

b.) he probably actually made them worse than if a trained monkey were calling the shots (i.e. hurting Garland's confidence...nearly ruining Cotts career, blowing so many of our starting pitcher's fine outing by demoting Foulke or trotting Koch out there continually)

fquaye149
09-07-2005, 09:18 PM
Joe Torre and Jack McKeon are among the top managers in all of baseball, because they combine good decision making with getting a team to play for them. Ozzie would have benefitted a lot by spending another season or two under Trader Jack's tutorship.

Oh - I certainly didn't mean to imply that they aren't players' managers. What I just couldn't think of too many other big league managers (Cox excepted) who would fit the bill of great gametime managers.

Even people who get all the press (Gardenhire) make stupid decisions so much that you have to wonder.

I guess my point is - if you went to see the Rolling Stones play and Keith Richards hit a flat note on a guitar solo he would have the swagger to keep on playing it through and unless you knew a lot about music and were paying close attention you wouldn't know the difference. In fact, the solo wouldn't likely suffer much at all in the greater scheme of things. However, if some brat-punk guitarist flubbed up his notes he's probably get so flustered he'd ruin the entire song.

For whatever reason Ozzie seems to be like Keith (without the damn talent)...shrugging it off and keeping on strutting even if he makes a blunder. JM was like a shrinking violet, always third guessing himself and outthinking everything. It was hard to be sure if he was ever confident in his convictions, for instance when he slumped out to meekly argue calls that were clearly blown in the other team's favor. An attitude like that has to rub off on a team. IMO so does an attitude like Ozzie's.

I'd rather play drums for Keith.

Mohoney
09-07-2005, 09:36 PM
The only real problem that I have with Ozzie is that he sometimes starts off the 9th inning with Marte when lefty hitters are due up, despite the fact that Marte is not a 9th inning pitcher.

Marte is a fine 7th or even 8th inning guy, but he walks too many hitters to be a 9th inning option.

HotelWhiteSox
09-07-2005, 10:33 PM
I'm not a huge fan of Ozzie and some of his decisions, but who cares?

No offense to him, but just because Daver says it doesn't automatically mean that it has to be right ( e.g. (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=624343&highlight=average#post624343) ), especially if it's something that is more about opinions than something that can be proven as right or wrong. Form opinions for yourselves and don't worry about it/what others think if you believe in it!

SouthSide_HitMen
09-07-2005, 10:47 PM
Players liked playing for Valentine, his problem was the fact that he was a goof that made worse decisions than even Ozzie does.

Joe Torre and Jack McKeon are among the top managers in all of baseball, because they combine good decision making with getting a team to play for them. Ozzie would have benefitted a lot by spending another season or two under Trader Jack's tutorship.

Don't leave out Ozzie's final years in Atlanta. Bobby Cox is the best in the business today. Glad Ozzie played / coached under Cox and McKeon. Hopefully victory cigars are on hand on the South Side this October.

SouthSide_HitMen
09-07-2005, 10:49 PM
I mean, starting pitching is huge...but the 2002 team had arguably a better bullpen and a much better lineup. Not that that should make up all the way, but 15 games better?

Better bullpen? Don't think so. I'll give you better lineup but our lineup this year is bashed beyond what they should be. They will raise hell in October and the staff and bullpen is ready to shut things down on the opposition.

ode to veeck
09-08-2005, 01:33 AM
was Ozzie reading this thread tonight ... just before he pulled Bobby Jenks to put in Marte in the 9th ?!

wdelaney72
09-08-2005, 10:25 AM
Players liked playing for Valentine, his problem was the fact that he was a goof that made worse decisions than even Ozzie does.

Joe Torre and Jack McKeon are among the top managers in all of baseball, because they combine good decision making with getting a team to play for them. Ozzie would have benefitted a lot by spending another season or two under Trader Jack's tutorship.

When Ozzie was hired, who do you think would have been a better selection as manager?

I agree that Ozzie's baseball-field-strategy decisions are often poor, I think he's proven to have the ability to effectively manage the off-the-field aspects of the team. There are very few managers that have the ability to do both. Bobby Cox and Jack McKeon are the first two that come to mind.

Brian26
09-08-2005, 12:59 PM
Meanwhile, the 2003 pitching staff was worse than ours, but definitely not 15 games worse, all the while our lineup was light years beyond this year's.

I politefully disagree with that too. On paper, I think the 2003 lineup looked better and had the potential to be spectacular, but, in reality, it wasn't.

Position by Position 2003 vs. 2005:

C: Olivo/Sandy vs. AJ : Advantage AJ 2005
1b: Slumping PK vs. Nonslumping PK: Advantage PK 2005
2b: Willie/Jiminez/Alomar vs. Iguchi: Advantage Iguchi 2005
ss: Valentin v. Uribe: Advantage Uribe 2005 (same pop, better defense)
3b: Crede vs. Crede: Push or advantage 2005 Crede
LF: Caballo vs. Pods: Push (too close to call)
CF: Rowand/Everett vs. Rowand: Advantage Rowand 2005
RF: Mags vs. Dye: Advantage Mags 2003
DH: Frank vs. Everett: Advantage Frank 2003

So two slots in the 2003 lineup were better than the current lineup.

maurice
09-08-2005, 01:09 PM
Ozzie has once again ilustrated my concern with using too many relievers and pulling the effective ones too early. Fortunately, it all worked out in the end.
:bandance:

NardiWasHere
09-08-2005, 02:11 PM
His being a player manager is great this year but may be a bad thing in future years (ala Dusty).


They are different types of 'player' managers. Ozzie is the "I just want to win, but we respect and like each other" type of guy. Dusty is the "I won't hold anyone accountable for their mistakes" type of guy. If Ozzie wanted to try to bat someone besides Podsednik first, he wouldn't ask Podsednik if it was ok. Dusty ran Lawton leading off past hairston and perez.

jerry myers
09-08-2005, 05:30 PM
It drives me batty when he takes out a reliever when he is doing good! Jenks the other day then Marte hits 2 batters, nerve racking why why why but i love ozzy he should be manager of the year by far. He means what he says.he is a leader! He is what we needed, great move by KW.

fquaye149
09-08-2005, 06:13 PM
I politefully disagree with that too. On paper, I think the 2003 lineup looked better and had the potential to be spectacular, but, in reality, it wasn't.

Position by Position 2003 vs. 2005:

C: Olivo/Sandy vs. AJ : Advantage AJ 2005
1b: Slumping PK vs. Nonslumping PK: Advantage PK 2005
2b: Willie/Jiminez/Alomar vs. Iguchi: Advantage Iguchi 2005
ss: Valentin v. Uribe: Advantage Uribe 2005 (same pop, better defense)
3b: Crede vs. Crede: Push or advantage 2005 Crede
LF: Caballo vs. Pods: Push (too close to call)
CF: Rowand/Everett vs. Rowand: Advantage Rowand 2005
RF: Mags vs. Dye: Advantage Mags 2003
DH: Frank vs. Everett: Advantage Frank 2003

So two slots in the 2003 lineup were better than the current lineup.

You're not necessarily wrong. However our 3/4/5/6/7 in '03 by the second half was:

Maggs/Frank/Paulie/Carlos/Everett.

That is Red Sox-esque