PDA

View Full Version : Jose Paniagua


Muopsies
09-26-2005, 05:07 PM
Is this the guy that, in my opinion, cost the sox the division in 2003 by waking up the Twins' bats in game 2 of the 4 game series in September at the Cell? We were ahead 8-2 until he came in and won 8-6, right?

Ol' No. 2
09-26-2005, 05:16 PM
Is this the guy that, in my opinion, cost the sox the division in 2003 by waking up the Twins' bats in game 2 of the 4 game series in September at the Cell? We were ahead 8-2 until he came in and won 8-6, right?Sox fans blaming Paniagua is like Cubs fans blaming Bartman.

kittle42
09-26-2005, 05:22 PM
Sox fans blaming Paniagua is like Cubs fans blaming Bartman.

Seriously. The Sox didn't even lose that game.

SSN721
09-26-2005, 05:33 PM
It was a turning point in the season strictly in the fact you can use that event to mark the pouint in time everything changed. It was an awful thing to witness, having been at the game it was quite disturbing to watch. But I agree with the above comments, to blame him for the loss of the division in 2003 is crazy.

SoxSpeed22
09-26-2005, 06:03 PM
I said earlier, the moment that sticks in the memory is the one to get blamed. Paniagua barking at the ump and Jerry, Bartman reaching for the ball. It's all BS. It's everyone's fault in both cases.

Mohoney
09-27-2005, 08:35 AM
Sox fans blaming Paniagua is like Cubs fans blaming Bartman.

In truth there is beauty, in beauty, truth.

bluestar
09-27-2005, 11:11 AM
Jose Paniagua is merely a sidenote to that entire series. What really killed whatever momentum the Sox had then were two outstanding pitching performances by Johan Santana and Brad Radke in games 3 and 4 in that series.

PaleHoseGeorge
09-27-2005, 11:39 AM
For my money the quintessential moment of the '03 Sox flameout wasn't Paniaqua's 1/3 inning relief appearance. It was Manuel interjecting his managerial acumen into a surging ballclub's fortunes by holding back Mark Buehrle to start against last-place Detroit -- simply because the Sox had already won the first two games in Yankee Stadium.
:o:

Neal Cotts lost Manuel's defacto forfeit in Yankee Stadium, and Buehrle wasn't sharp and got tagged the following night in Detroit, too. THAT was the beginning of the end. The ballclub never played well after those 2 victories in Yankee Stadium thanks to Manuel. The players gave up on him. And frankly, who can blame 'em?

:jerry
"I guess they didn't like me either for starting Aaron Rowand in Anaheim 'because he's from around here.'"

kittle42
09-27-2005, 12:24 PM
:jerry
"I guess they didn't like me either for starting Aaron Rowand in Anaheim 'because he's from around here.'"

:ozzie
"No problem, Jerry...I would do that, too...you owed that kid."

Stroker Ace
09-27-2005, 01:02 PM
For my money the quintessential moment of the '03 Sox flameout wasn't Paniaqua's 1/3 inning relief appearance. It was Manuel interjecting his managerial acumen into a surging ballclub's fortunes by holding back Mark Buehrle to start against last-place Detroit -- simply because the Sox had already won the first two games in Yankee Stadium.
:o:

Neal Cotts lost Manuel's defacto forfeit in Yankee Stadium, and Buehrle wasn't sharp and got tagged the following night in Detroit, too. THAT was the beginning of the end. The ballclub never played well after those 2 victories in Yankee Stadium thanks to Manuel. The players gave up on him. And frankly, who can blame 'em?

:jerry
"I guess they didn't like me either for starting Aaron Rowand in Anaheim 'because he's from around here.'"That was the most frustrating point of that season. What kind of idiot decides to send a young guy out to make his 3rd or 4th ML start when you can send out the team's ace? Even if it wasn't in NY, it's a horrible decision.

ewokpelts
09-27-2005, 01:20 PM
That was the most frustrating point of that season. What kind of idiot decides to send a young guy out to make his 3rd or 4th ML start when you can send out the team's ace? Even if it wasn't in NY, it's a horrible decision.
IT WAS HIS FIRST EVER MLB START.......you dont throw a kid 2 weeks fresh from the all star futures game at the yankees in august, when they're sharpening thier claws for the postseason..
Gene

IowaSox1971
09-28-2005, 06:32 PM
Why is everyone so sure that Buehrle would have beaten the Yankees in that start? In the game Cotts started, we lost, 7-5, to the eventual AL champion. In the game Buehrle started the next night, we gave up eight runs and lost to one of the worst teams ever. If Buehrle had pitched a great game in Detroit, then you might have a case.

The only reason this was a big issue a few years ago was that Buehrle and Hawk chose to make it one. There was nothing wrong with sticking with our regular rotation. It was Cotts' turn to pitch. We were heading into a hectic final month of the season, and Manuel simply wanted to give Buehrle, who had thrown a ton of innings, a chance to get an extra day of rest for perhaps the final time that season. Yes, Buehrle could have started because we had had an off day earlier in the week, but we had already been skipping the fifth starter spot a lot that season and Manuel wanted to avoid burning out one of our best pitchers. I think Loaiza struggled a bit at the end of that season, and not giving our top pitchers many extra days off that season might have been a reason.

Lip Man 1
09-28-2005, 10:52 PM
Iowa:

I'll have to disagree with you on this one. It was a chance to make a statement to the Yankees as well as to the Sox players themselves and Manager Gandhi blew it. What do you think the attitude was in the locker room after the team heard about it and his reasoning for it?

It probably wasn't pleasant. Also from what I understand Kenny Williams wasn't very happy about it either.

Lip

SOX ADDICT '73
09-28-2005, 11:28 PM
UN-:hijacked:
Even though this relates to the original topic of the thread, it feels like a hijack because of the "Cotts vs. Buehrle vs. Manuel" direction it's taken, but...

The funniest/saddest sight I saw at this year's Sox Fest was some guy wearing a "PANIAGUA" jersey. At first I laughed, but then I remembered what followed his one and only appearance in '03, and it put me in a bad mood...:(:

Optipessimism
09-29-2005, 12:04 AM
The Cotts/Buerhle sitaution in '03 kind of reminds me of something Mike North said a few days ago about Ozzie pitching McCarthy against Santana. North was arguing that the Sox were going to lose, so they might as well save McCarthy for the next game and pitch El Duque instead. I think that you always have to give your team the best chance to win every day out there, so I liked Ozzie using McCarthy who had been solid to keep us in the game instead of just throwing it away. Manuel threw it away when he chose Cotts instead of Buerhle against the Yanks. Instead of giving the team a real chance to win against the Yanks and then letting Cotts off easier by starting him against the lowly Detroit Bagheads, he screwed the team, Mark, and Neal. That's why I agree with PHG, Buerhle, Hawk, and most of the others here who say Manuel lost the team with that decision.

mike squires
09-29-2005, 12:10 AM
Why we talking about this now??? Let's keep it positive folks, let's keep it positive.:D:

While we're at it, let's bring up our weekly Dybber/Britt Burns post.

SOX ADDICT '73
09-29-2005, 12:39 AM
The Cotts/Buerhle sitaution in '03 kind of reminds me of something Mike North said a few days ago about Ozzie pitching McCarthy against Santana. North was arguing that the Sox were going to lose, so they might as well save McCarthy for the next game and pitch El Duque instead. I think that you always have to give your team the best chance to win every day out there, so I liked Ozzie using McCarthy who had been solid to keep us in the game instead of just throwing it away. Manuel threw it away when he chose Cotts instead of Buerhle against the Yanks. Instead of giving the team a real chance to win against the Yanks and then letting Cotts off easier by starting him against the lowly Detroit Bagheads, he screwed the team, Mark, and Neal. That's why I agree with PHG, Buerhle, Hawk, and most of the others here who say Manuel lost the team with that decision.
Great point! After last Wednesday's 8-0 pantsing by Cleveland (which I was unfortunate enough to have attended - my first Sox loss since 2000 :angry: ), the beat-down that the Twins would've surely put on El Duque (who's been useless after starting 7-1) might've had a negative effect on the team's psyche over the next three games. Instead, they got a stellar pitching performance and a hard-fought loss, which they followed up with three huge wins!

Foulke You
09-29-2005, 03:24 AM
I blame only one man for the 2003 debacle and it wasn't Jose Paniagua:

:jerry
1) The oft mentioned Neal Cotts in Yankee Stadium incident
2) He started a completely flu-ridden Esteban Loaiza in Game 1 of the do-or-die Metrodome series in September. Loaiza was ineffective and was chased early after giving up 5 runs if I remember right.
3) Stuck with Royce Clayton longer than any baseball fan should ever have to endure
4) "Resting" Robbie Alomar in key games down the stretch in favor of Willie Harris
5) Sticking with Koch as closer longer than any baseball fan should ever have to endure

I can honestly name dozens of more instances, but why bring up bad memories? The dark days of 2003 are ancient history now.