PDA

View Full Version : Ozzie/KW debate


caulfield12
03-03-2007, 05:16 AM
and it goes a little something like this...

1) Would we ever have won the World Series with Cito Gaston or Jerry Manuel as manager? Ron Schueler as GM?

No, no and no.

2) Would anything interesting ever happen surrounding our team with the aforementioned group in power?

3) Would Jerry Reinsdorf have a more positive image in the city? Or the Sox organization? Well, it's hard to imagine the White Sox having higher ratings that the Cubs or essentially equal attendance?

I've seen the other side of the coin on this issue. I went to Iowa and KF is the most "vanilla" coach in the world. The fans loved him when he was "blue collar" and leading them to New Year's Day bowls every season. But now that he is one of the three highest paid coaches in the country, fans are now turning against him a little...especially when the team disappointed this past year.

It's much better than having a guy like Steve Alford as coach/manager...Alford in the past almost always blamed his players for losses (see Ozzie/McCarthy), would take the credit for wins, never admit he could do things differently or better (like playing Mackowiak in CF). The guy is more about his image, and Ozzie might be a little too arrogant now, but at least he's winning.

ewokpelts
03-03-2007, 05:39 AM
Who's alford and KF? and why would i want them as the sox manager?

caulfield12
03-03-2007, 08:12 AM
The point is the Kirk Ferentz is the most boring, vanilla interview...perhaps in the entire country. When he was winning, it was because he had so much integrity, he was so "down to earth" and calm and low key. He's about as opposite of Ozzie as you can get.

In this argument, there are inevitably comparisons between Ozzie and Ditka, so I was drawing another parallel.

Would White Sox fans have been more proud if Jerry Manuel, with his Gandhian "non violence" background and "soft" management style, led us to the World Series victory? I don't think so...the fact is, Ozzie has the White Sox background and is more like a "favorite son" to many fans who grew up watching the team in the 80's and 90's.

KW and Ozzie are, if nothing else, passionate. Do they show favoritism? Do they act like little kids sometimes? Should they be above that? Of course!. Do they say things we wish we would be able to say to the media or to our bosses but can't get away with? Maybe! Heck, Phil Rogers was accusing Ozzie of being a "company" guy the other day for not giving him quotes ripping into the organization for trading Garcia. Did he suspect Ozzie to say "that move just killed our chances to make the playoffs. I love him like one of my own sons, and I'm PISSED at Williams and Reinsdorf for being cheap. Gavin Floyd is garbage, and Gio is at least a year away...."

The Critic
03-03-2007, 08:57 AM
I wouldn't want Kevin Federline managing the Sox, either....
.....ohhh, you meant Kirk Ferentz?
:D:

caulfield12
03-03-2007, 09:09 AM
It's funny you say that.

He's probably the most desired candidate (well maybe after U. Meyer and Carroll, but maybe not) to take an NFL head coaching job that a lot of people still haven't heard of.

Before last year, Iowa (along with FSU and Georgia) was one of only three teams to go to four straight New Year's day bowls.

Iowa?

WhiteSox5187
03-03-2007, 06:19 PM
I think you're right that Jerry Manuel would never have gotten us to a World Series, but ya know, Ron Scheuler and Roland Heymond, those were pretty good GMs and they MIGHT have been able to get us to one. Heymond had bad timing and a small budget under Veeck and once Reisendorf came in a gave him a budget to work with, he had us in the playoffs in three years (with a close call in the strike shortened season of '81) but then Reisendorf for some reason choose Hawk as a GM and that killed our chances at a WS title.

Scheuler was the architect of the '93 team three years after taking over and I'm still convinced we woulda won in '94 had it not been for hte strike. He also put together the 2000 team on a shoe string budget thanks to Mr. Reisendorf again.

Kenny is a very VERY good GM, but the guy isn't infallible. He's made plenty of lousy trades (see: Todd Richie) and I don't think he's THE best GM in baseball (he's up there though). To win a WS you have to have lots of talent and the stars have to allign themselves and you get lucky, Scheuler and Heymond assembled lots of talent but they never really had any luck. Kenny got the talent and the stars were aligned, '05 was OUR year. But I don't think that that makes Heymond or Scheluer any less of a GM.

Finally you mentioned "would Jerry Reisendorf have such a positive image" in this city?" He STILL doesn't have a very positive image. We're all glad that he brought us the title, but take a look at the boards after Freddy was traded and Garland was ALMOST traded. People (myself included) were saying "Uh-oh, here we go again! Jerry wants to go cheap!" We will always remember 2005, but we also always remember 1994, the White Flag trade, and a couple of things he did with the Bulls. He's not reviled like he used to be, but he certainly isn't loved. There are a lot of people who will turn on him in a second. In Chicago it's really a matter of "What have you done for me lately?"

vegyrex
03-03-2007, 08:43 PM
I

Scheuler was the architect of the '93 team three years after taking over and I'm still convinced we woulda won in '94 had it not been for hte strike. He also put together the 2000 team on a shoe string budget thanks to Mr. Reisendorf again.



Larry Himes set the foundation for the '93 and '94 teams. Ron Schueler can take full credit for the 2000 team, but he'll also have to take some of the blame for the "white flag" trades as well. If he had gotten Roger Clemons, who was available and willing to come to the Sox that year, instead of worthless Navarro things might have turned out differently.

WhiteSox5187
03-03-2007, 10:18 PM
Larry Himes set the foundation for the '93 and '94 teams.Ron Schueler can take full credit for the 2000 team, but he'll also have to take some of the blame for the "white flag" trades as well. If he had gotten Roger Clemons, who was available and willing to come to the Sox that year, instead of worthless Navarro things might have turned out differently.
Larry Himes did have several good drafts, obviously, but he was gone by the start of the 1990 season. So while the core guys (McDowell, Frank, Ventura) were Himes' guys, Schueler brought in a lot of filler guys like Cora, Bo Jackson who helped make that team. Of course taking Navarro instead of Clemens was a mistake, but EVERY GM has made several bad moves...and the White Flag Trade was done more at the order of Mr. Reisndorf than Schueler.

DumpJerry
03-03-2007, 11:42 PM
So, you're saying this Kirk Ferentz guy (whoever he is) is a football coach of some sort and would have been the White Sox manager (a baseball team, BTW) if Ozzie was not willing or available for the job?:?: :?: :?: :?: :?:

Did you create this thread for the sake of creating a thread??

Brian26
03-03-2007, 11:44 PM
Larry Himes did have several good drafts, obviously, but he was gone by the start of the 1990 season.

Himes was with the Sox until the end of the 1990 season. Himes was present for the 1990 draft (Alex Fernandez).

Brian26
03-03-2007, 11:50 PM
So while the core guys (McDowell, Frank, Ventura) were Himes' guys, Schueler brought in a lot of filler guys like Cora, Bo Jackson who helped make that team.

Bo Jackson had very little to do with the success of the 1993 team. He was in the right place at the right time for the homer on the night of the clincher.

As for Himes and Schueler, it's fair to give equal credit to both guys for building the '93 team. Schueler made some nice moves to get some experienced players on the team like Raines and Burks, along with solid pitching pickups (Belcher and McCaskill).

ilsox7
03-04-2007, 12:10 AM
Bo Jackson had very little to do with the success of the 1993 team. He was in the right place at the right time for the homer on the night of the clincher.



That was the highest home run I think I have ever seen (on TV). I remember when he hit it, my dad and I both jumped up b/c it looked like an absolute bomb. What seemed like 5 minutes later, it came down, just beyond the fence.

WhiteSox5187
03-04-2007, 12:28 AM
Bo Jackson had very little to do with the success of the 1993 team. He was in the right place at the right time for the homer on the night of the clincher.

As for Himes and Schueler, it's fair to give equal credit to both guys for building the '93 team. Schueler made some nice moves to get some experienced players on the team like Raines and Burks, along with solid pitching pickups (Belcher and McCaskill).
Right, I just used Bo because he came to mind...it's amazing, Himes did a lot of good things for the Sox (he was also a pain in the ass to work with apparently) and he destroyed the Cubs organization. The perfect Sox GM!!!

My point though, with Hemond and Schueler was that they were just as good as Kenny. It's just that Kenny had the stars lined up in 2005. If they win again though with Kenny at the helm, then he catapults those guys (but it should be mentioned! Hemond helped Kenny out in 2005!!!)

caulfield12
03-04-2007, 12:48 AM
The first World Series championship in 88 years catapults KW past both those guys.

2000 team was seriously flawed and had no chance to win in the playoffs with Sirotka, Baldwin and Parque as the top three starters.

FarWestChicago
03-04-2007, 12:50 AM
Did you create this thread for the sake of creating a thread??I would say that accurately sums up the situation.

JB98
03-04-2007, 02:51 AM
So, you're saying this Kirk Ferentz guy (whoever he is) is a football coach of some sort and would have been the White Sox manager (a baseball team, BTW) if Ozzie was not willing or available for the job?:?: :?: :?: :?: :?:

Did you create this thread for the sake of creating a thread??

Actually, I think he's saying Steve Alford is very similar to Ozzie and would be excellent as manager of the White Sox.

ewokpelts
03-04-2007, 03:27 AM
Actually, I think he's saying Steve Alford is very similar to Ozzie and would be excellent as manager of the White Sox.and stevo is a football coach?

caulfield12
03-04-2007, 07:46 AM
I'll sum it up:

Win and have a BIG personality=best

Win and have a "vanilla," Cito Gaston personality=okay

Lose or be .500 and be like Ozzie or Alford=not good

Craig Grebeck
03-04-2007, 10:15 AM
That's idiotic. How about win and not be such an egotistical prick like Ozzie.

DumpJerry
03-04-2007, 10:34 AM
So, you're saying this Kirk Ferentz guy (whoever he is) is a football coach of some sort and would have been the White Sox manager (a baseball team, BTW) if Ozzie was not willing or available for the job?:?: :?: :?: :?: :?:

Did you create this thread for the sake of creating a thread??

Actually, I think he's saying Steve Alford is very similar to Ozzie and would be excellent as manager of the White Sox.

and stevo is a football coach?
I'm convinced Caulfield ran out of newspaper stories to post and just HAD to start up a thread.

Hitmen77
03-04-2007, 12:08 PM
Larry Himes did have several good drafts, obviously, but he was gone by the start of the 1990 season. So while the core guys (McDowell, Frank, Ventura) were Himes' guys, Schueler brought in a lot of filler guys like Cora, Bo Jackson who helped make that team. Of course taking Navarro instead of Clemens was a mistake, but EVERY GM has made several bad moves...and the White Flag Trade was done more at the order of Mr. Reisndorf than Schueler.

Himes also benefited from usually having higher draft picks than his successors because of the poor records the Sox had from 86? to 1989.

I'm not saying that totally takes away from Himes's accomplishment because there are plenty of GM who get high draft picks year after year and never make any good picks. But, it's one factor to consider since 1990 the Sox have had very few teams that were much below .500.

IndianWhiteSox
03-04-2007, 01:10 PM
That's idiotic. How about win and not be such an egotistical prick like Ozzie.

Jay Marrioti is that you?
:tongue:

WhiteSox5187
03-04-2007, 07:05 PM
Himes also benefited from usually having higher draft picks than his successors because of the poor records the Sox had from 86? to 1989.

I'm not saying that totally takes away from Himes's accomplishment because there are plenty of GM who get high draft picks year after year and never make any good picks. But, it's one factor to consider since 1990 the Sox have had very few teams that were much below .500.
When WAS the last time we finished below .500? In 2002 we finished exactly at .500, but do you have to go back to like '95 or '96?

caulfield12
03-04-2007, 07:16 PM
1999 75-86
2002 81-81

Brian26
03-04-2007, 08:16 PM
Himes also benefited from usually having higher draft picks than his successors because of the poor records the Sox had from 86? to 1989.

Although you are correct about the Sox getting higher draft picks, I wouldn't attribute Himes success to that. Unlike the NFL and NBA, draft pick order in baseball is meaningless without intelligent scouting and preparation. Many players have been drafted in the first round and never played a major league game, while others have been selected with late picks and become successful. The MLB draft is an entirely different animal than the other sports.

WhiteSox5187
03-05-2007, 12:59 AM
Although you are correct about the Sox getting higher draft picks, I wouldn't attribute Himes success to that. Unlike the NFL and NBA, draft pick order in baseball is meaningless without intelligent scouting and preparation. Many players have been drafted in the first round and never played a major league game, while others have been selected with late picks and become successful. The MLB draft is an entirely different animal than the other sports.
Yep, didn't Buerhle come in like, the 200th round or was the 200th pick or something? It's all about scouting. Himes made the picks, but it was the scouts who told him who to pick.

ilsox7
03-05-2007, 02:25 AM
Yep, didn't Buerhle come in like, the 200th round or was the 200th pick or something? It's all about scouting. Himes made the picks, but it was the scouts who told him who to pick.

38th round.

ewokpelts
03-05-2007, 10:57 AM
Although you are correct about the Sox getting higher draft picks, I wouldn't attribute Himes success to that. Unlike the NFL and NBA, draft pick order in baseball is meaningless without intelligent scouting and preparation. Many players have been drafted in the first round and never played a major league game, while others have been selected with late picks and become successful. The MLB draft is an entirely different animal than the other sports.But the Sox' high picks in those years allowed them a chance at certain prospects that ended up doing very well.

:hurt

Hitmen77
03-05-2007, 03:26 PM
Although you are correct about the Sox getting higher draft picks, I wouldn't attribute Himes success to that. Unlike the NFL and NBA, draft pick order in baseball is meaningless without intelligent scouting and preparation. Many players have been drafted in the first round and never played a major league game, while others have been selected with late picks and become successful. The MLB draft is an entirely different animal than the other sports.

...and that's why in the part of my post that you didn't quote I said it was just "one factor to consider" and doesn't totally take away from his accomplishments while with the Sox.

By the way, IIRC, McDowell, Ventura, Thomas, and Fernandez were all first round picks during the Himes era. So, in those situations, having a high pick probably made the difference in getting those guys. Of course there's more to building an organization than 1st round picks, but those 4 players are the ones most heavily associated with Himes's success here and that's why I felt that the draft position was worth noting.

skobabe8
03-05-2007, 03:53 PM
That was the highest home run I think I have ever seen (on TV). I remember when he hit it, my dad and I both jumped up b/c it looked like an absolute bomb. What seemed like 5 minutes later, it came down, just beyond the fence.

Thats my memory as well. I was sitting in right field and it was absolutely the highest hr id ever seen.

JB98
03-05-2007, 07:48 PM
and stevo is a football coach?

Obviously not. I think you missed what I was trying to say, but this thread and this topic are so dumb that I think I'd rather just let the whole thing die than explain it.

soxinem1
03-06-2007, 07:02 PM
It's all about scouting. Himes made the picks, but it was the scouts who told him who to pick.

But having all your #1 picks become All-Star caliber within a year of turning pro is no small trick!