All of the "VALENTINE SUCKS DID YOU SEE HIM ON TV" folks must have missed Girardi on TV.
You'd be happy with Girardi being hired as the next Sox manager? Hypothetical, of course.
Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?
Posted 30 September 2011 - 12:16 PM
All of the "VALENTINE SUCKS DID YOU SEE HIM ON TV" folks must have missed Girardi on TV.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 12:16 PM
Pedro, Ortiz, Millar, Schilling all say hi.Thank you.
Plus, what on god's green earth gives you the sense that (Pedroia notwithstanding) this organization likes guys with big mouths and personalities?
Posted 30 September 2011 - 12:21 PM
You'd be happy with Girardi being hired as the next Sox manager? Hypothetical, of course.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 12:27 PM
Yes, I would. Results are what matters.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 12:27 PM
For all the shit we give him he is actually a good manager, top 5 imo. He understands the metrics and he isnt afraid to wave his dick around. He might bunt and use the IBB a bit too much but usually gets the desired result. I also think he is a great tactician when it comes to utilizing his bench in late game scenarios.You'd be happy with Girardi being hired as the next Sox manager? Hypothetical, of course.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 12:28 PM
Yes, I would. Results are what matters.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 12:30 PM
Posted 30 September 2011 - 12:34 PM
IIRC when Hoffman was interviewed he was apparently so umimpressove the Sox announced he was out of the running before he even got to Logan for his flight home.Looking back at this article, Francona was hired over the likes of Joe Maddon, Glenn Hoffman, and DeMarlo Hale. Hoffman is currently the Padres 3rd base coach (for the last 6 seasons) and has half a season of experience managing the 1998 Dodgers (47-41 record). He doesn't seem like a fit but, considering he was interviewed once, then I guess the Sox have some interest in him.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 12:34 PM
This is the stupidest fucking thing you have ever said. Results obviously don't matter to you, you care about banal tactical decisions and are stupid enough to think people want to hear you caterwaul about them every night.
Results? Terry Francona has gotten results that are enviable to any manager in the game, but you are willing to throw them away because it doesn't fit your little self-affirmation exercise.
Joe Girardi makes similar decisions to Terry Francona every damn night. And the argument that Tito is a product of his players is as applicable if not more to Girardi.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 12:38 PM
Hale is the 3rd name on the list. He's on the staff now. He knows the players. Why wouldn't it be him?
Posted 30 September 2011 - 12:39 PM
Sure he can replicate his results in Boston ... if he brings CC and Mo with him.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 12:39 PM
Is it that inconceivable that had Giradi (or somebody else, I'm not that a big fan of his anyway,) managed the Sox the last 3 years they'd have more than 0 playoff wins?
Posted 30 September 2011 - 12:46 PM
Can we get him to coach 3rd, with a bump in pay? Maybe a title/responsibility bump, too, to help Lowrie and Iglesias with SS development.Looking back at this article, Francona was hired over the likes of Joe Maddon, Glenn Hoffman, and DeMarlo Hale. Hoffman is currently the Padres 3rd base coach (for the last 6 seasons) and has half a season of experience managing the 1998 Dodgers (47-41 record). He doesn't seem like a fit but, considering he was interviewed once, then I guess the Sox have some interest in him.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 12:49 PM
But he's also a guy who knows how the ownership and FO want to run things, via a rational approach using both scouting and advanced statistical analysis.Because maybe he was part of the problem, or at least wasn't part of the solution. Or maybe they don't want someone with such a close relationship to the coddled players.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 12:54 PM
But he's also a guy who knows how the ownership and FO want to run things, via a rational approach using both scouting and advanced statistical analysis.
Edited by Ananti, 30 September 2011 - 12:54 PM.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 12:58 PM
If this is true this is a remarkably stupid decision by the ownership. "Lack of urgency"? "Lack of urgency" worked pretty damn well when we were down 0-3 in the 2004 ALCS and pulled off THE GREATEST COMEBACK IN THE HISTORY OF SPORTS on the way to the first championship in 86 years. "Lack of urgency" worked pretty damn well when we were down 1-3 in Cleveland facing their ace, and we started a winning streak that ended in the SECOND WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP, that was two more than many people have lived to see prior to Francona taking over this team.
"Lack of urgency" gets you a team cool and composed enough to stare down a seven-run deficit in the seventh inning of an elimination game and say, "We may go down in this series, but not today!" (And the irony that a similar 8-7 victory to the team we did this to may cost us THE BEST MANAGER IN RED SOX HISTORY is not lost on me.) I believed we were going to win the 2008 ALCS and go one to our third World Series championship, because the team, like its manager, was HARD TO KILL.
And last season, when injuries struck the club to such a degree that a 7-20 September record would have been explicable and we somehow fought to stay in contention until the last few days of the season, that is also a trademark of a club managed by THE BEST MANAGER IN RED SOX HISTORY.
And now they are going to dismiss all of that because of ONE BAD FUCKING MONTH? What happened to small sample size? The only person who could have managed this club better would have been Jesus Christ, because He could have healed Dice-K, Clay, Beckett, Bedard, et al, and allowed the team to run a real major league level starter out there every night instead of the dreck Francona had to rely on. If this is not Tito's decision to leave but the management's, then they are the ones who have turned this season from a footnote into a disaster.
Shame on them. I thought they were smarter than that.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 12:59 PM
Phillip Seymour Hoffman would be an intriguing choice.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 01:04 PM
Posted 30 September 2011 - 01:14 PM
Whew, previous posts I saw had no first name and I could only think of Buck Martinez.I kind of like the Dave Martinez idea though.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 01:17 PM
Looking back at this article, Francona was hired over the likes of Joe Maddon, Glenn Hoffman, and DeMarlo Hale. Hoffman is currently the Padres 3rd base coach (for the last 6 seasons) and has half a season of experience managing the 1998 Dodgers (47-41 record). He doesn't seem like a fit but, considering he was interviewed once, then I guess the Sox have some interest in him.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 01:20 PM
What part of Bobby V's 1117-1072 record, including presiding over one of the most disappointing teams in recent history (the 2001-02 Mets) gets people around here so excited?
Posted 30 September 2011 - 01:47 PM
I thought Macha was considered oddly uncommunicative by the players in Oakland. That doesn't seem very good if true.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 03:39 PM
Posted 30 September 2011 - 03:52 PM
He was pretty terrible in the '07 ALCS.Any chance we can get Eric Wedge out of Seattle? I have always been a big fan of his.
EDIT- May be tough...we'd have to buy out 2 years...
Maddon's just signed through next season, so the Sox could go to a stopgap. I don't know if Maddon fits here, though. He's a good tactician, but he makes some really ugly lineups. The FO would have to keep scrappy bench players off the roster, else they end up batting 2nd against the Yankees.Maddon and Farrell aren't walking through that door. It'd be nice, but until either of their contracts are up, forget it.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 04:17 PM
Is this tongue in cheek, because the Rays payroll is about one fourth that of the Red Sox.He was pretty terrible in the '07 ALCS.
Maddon's just signed through next season, so the Sox could go to a stopgap. I don't know if Maddon fits here, though. He's a good tactician, but he makes some really ugly lineups. The FO would have to keep scrappy bench players off the roster, else they end up batting 2nd against the Yankees.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 04:32 PM
Posted 30 September 2011 - 04:40 PM
Maddon's just signed through next season, so the Sox could go to a stopgap. I don't know if Maddon fits here, though. He's a good tactician, but he makes some really ugly lineups. The FO would have to keep scrappy bench players off the roster, else they end up batting 2nd against the Yankees.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 04:40 PM
IIRC when Hoffman was interviewed he was apparently so umimpressove the Sox announced he was out of the running before he even got to Logan for his flight home.
Hale is the 3rd name on the list. He's on the staff now. He knows the players. Why wouldn't it be him?
Posted 30 September 2011 - 04:42 PM
Posted 30 September 2011 - 04:45 PM
Posted 30 September 2011 - 05:15 PM
Posted 30 September 2011 - 05:15 PM
Posted 30 September 2011 - 05:26 PM
Tony Pena was apparently obsessed with using little ball strategies while he was the manager in KC. Someone over at Baseballthinkfactory did a great job reworking Poe to describe it. Quoth the Pena . . little ball.Surprised there's not more talk here about Tony Pena. It ended badly for him it KC, but whose tenure in KC doesn't end badly. He's got the toughness to get the clubhouse in order, the sense of humor to manage in Boston, and serious baseball smarts.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 05:27 PM
What's your basis for saying this? It's not logically impossible that it's true but it's nearly an arbitrary assertion.I will post in the "Thank You Tito" thread as well, but I honestly believe the best manager for 2012 would be Jason Varitek. It has been mentioned in other threads and it keeps enough of the old and brings some new. LaRussa was a player/manager, Girardi only spent a few years as a coach before becoming a good manager. Tek can do this.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 05:28 PM
Surprised there's not more talk here about Tony Pena. It ended badly for him it KC, but whose tenure in KC doesn't end badly. He's got the toughness to get the clubhouse in order, the sense of humor to manage in Boston, and serious baseball smarts.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 05:30 PM
Posted 30 September 2011 - 05:40 PM
You're right, Rough, I didn't put much behind that. I may be wrong, but it seems to me that part of the Sox success throughout Tek's tenure here was partially due to his obsessive study of opposing hitters. Not to mention that he was a very good hitter himself until the past few years (and even with a bit of a comeback this year, for awhile.) That was on the edge at the time, and I feel he would continue to prepare players to know what to expect at all times. I also do not want to see some new face in the dugout. We don't suck, we need a tweak. Just my thoughts.What's your basis for saying this? It's not logically impossible that it's true but it's nearly an arbitrary assertion.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 06:14 PM
I think the Sox need a Frank Robinson, Don Baylor, et al type manager. Credibility because of their major league career, very smart, very tough. Kirk Gibson would also fit but is unlikely to move.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 06:45 PM
Edited by Ananti, 30 September 2011 - 06:46 PM.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 06:54 PM
Posted 30 September 2011 - 07:34 PM
Nobody can get past his .600 OPS he put up in his four years in Boston.Surprised there's not more talk here about Tony Pena. It ended badly for him it KC, but whose tenure in KC doesn't end badly. He's got the toughness to get the clubhouse in order, the sense of humor to manage in Boston, and serious baseball smarts.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 08:12 PM
Posted 30 September 2011 - 08:17 PM
While we're vetoing people, it'd be nice if Maddon wasn't brought up either. No chance he makes that move. He's not an NCAA football coach.
Phillip Seymour Hoffman would be an intriguing choice. It'd also be fun to be on this board if they hired away Scioscia, just for the meltdowns. He'd turn Jacoby into Juan Pierre 2.0 in no time at all.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 08:28 PM
A plus is that he can grow a cool mustache.Torey Lovullo and Don Wakamatsu were both mentioned in places tonight. Gammons seemed to like Eric Wedge, said he has experience working with front offices similar to Boston, he has managed good teams, shitty teams, and will have a good grip on the clubhouse. Frankly, with what he will be working with, that might be more important than his tactical ability.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 08:51 PM
A plus is that he can grow a cool mustache.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 09:00 PM
Posted 30 September 2011 - 09:05 PM
Posted 30 September 2011 - 09:10 PM
Edited by Ferm Sheller, 30 September 2011 - 09:14 PM.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 09:13 PM
Moreover, he missed the playoffs altogether with some very good Indian teams - the 2005-06 incarnations were way better than their records showed (the 2006 version under-performed their Pythagorean by 11 games). He's always seemed to be the sort of guy who makes a team less than the sum of its parts.Talking to my Indians friends, and remembering a discussion about him on MLB radio, I want no part of Wedge. His game-time decision making is awful and he did not take some very good Indian teams farther than the ALCS. He strikes me as unimpressive.
Posted 30 September 2011 - 09:19 PM
Didn't he have some gratuitous policies like every guy had to wear a sport coat when the team was travelling? He's like the character of Chef in Apocalypse Now only instead of being too tightly wound for Nam, he's too tightly wound for Fenway.Moreover, he missed the playoffs altogether with some very good Indian teams - the 2005-06 incarnations were way better than their records showed (the 2006 version under-performed their Pythagorean by 11 games). He's always seemed to be the sort of guy who makes a team less than the sum of its parts.
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users