Jump to content
jaws7575

Tony La Russa

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, SonofaRoache said:

The good stetches happened against the Royals, Tigers, and Pirates. Although other teams lost more to them, we matched up well and feasted on them. We went 13 and 22 against .500 teams. We went 7 and 13 against the top two teams in our division. This cannot be viewed as great accomplishment. We can appreciate the season being an overall success, but nothing special. 

The struggles came at the worst time as we were trying to win a division championship and a playoff series. Managers get fired for these types of performances, especially when they may be viewed as the norm. If we are being honest, the Sox and Ricky struggled more than the last 10 games of the season. Ricky in particular made poor decisions throughout the year He was credited by the front office for the team's success as Hahn said Ricky deserves to enjoy our success and to be a part of it. Ricky was so bad the last two and a half weeks that he coached himself out of any chance of being here next year. 

My thoughts exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dominikk85 said:

Is that so? The 2016 cubs lost 15 out of 20 games from June 20 to July 9, including a 5 game losing streak from July 5 to July 9.

They continued after that with a 21-6 streak, momentum doesn't exist. 

Let's rephrase this my fellow statistics loving soxtalker; momentum most certainly exists, as emotions can hurt or help performance but momentum can't be quantified therefore it need not be planned for and is entirely irrelavent for projecting future performance.

Edited by Look at Ray Ray Run

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

And ill add, if you think a manager is worth 3-4 wins in a 60 game season, then managers are the most underpaid people in the game. That would mean managers could be worth 8-10 fWAR over a season. 

Also, I dont think you understand my point. Im saying you take the good with the bad, and in reneterias case that was probably a net gain/loss of wins of ZERO if you account for his in game gaffes.

Your "point" is a gross simplification of numerous facets of the topic because you don't understand them enough to be analytical in even a rudimentary sense.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Dominikk85 said:

That is a bad Argumentation. I do believe Ricky was probably not the right guy but it is absurd to not give him credit for the wins but only blame him for the losses. It is true the Sox underperformed the last two weeks but they also played way above their heads the first 45 games unless you believe the Sox were like a 105 win team after being projected for 85 wins. 

You can't just say the first 45 games were the Sox new level and any deviation from that is on the manager. 

That being said of course it is always possible to get better. 

 

I guess we will see next year who is correct. If the Sox win more than 95 games than you can say that is their true talent level and Ricky was just holding them back. 

I stated why he's at fault for the losses and it's a simple equation.

Can you tell me why he deserves credit for wind? Simply because they won? Not even all those games are won because the manager made good decisions.

In that mindset, any team over .500 has a good manager.

The bad argumentation is only your own.

Edited by KonerkoFan1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, KonerkoFan1 said:

Your "point" is a gross simplification of numerous facets of the topic because you don't understand them enough to be analytical in even a rudimentary sense.

 

Yes, I don't understand them enough.

I don't understand the impact a manager can have on a baseball team, and I don't understand the managers role.

I also don't understand analytics or statistics. 

Both of those things are entirely foreign to me; never played baseball through college, and I don't work in analytics now. High Five!

Please help to educate me on what I'm missing. You should buy a baseball team, because you've found an edge so significant and no one else in the game has seen it; MANAGERS are underpaid and much more important to wins and losses than anyone in the game thinks. Get your bids in!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dominikk85 said:

Is that so? The 2016 cubs lost 15 out of 20 games from June 20 to July 9, including a 5 game losing streak from July 5 to July 9.

They continued after that with a 21-6 streak, momentum doesn't exist. 

In the course of a full season, teams aren't going 100 percent to win every game. Players will rest more because of injury and fatigue, teams will be exposed to more injuries, you will take trips all over the country to play baseball, managers will have Sunday lineups, and they will see a wider range of teams and players that they may not be able to fully prepare for. We are comparing apples to oranges here.

But do remember that Joe Maddon got fired after a slump to end the regular season last year. You cannot slump to end the season because of terrible managerial decisions. If it happens, the manager could be fired. Why? Because at that time you are going all out to win the most important games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Yes, I don't understand them enough.

I don't understand the impact a manager can have on a baseball team, and I don't understand the managers role.

I also don't understand analytics or statistics. 

Both of those things are entirely foreign to me; never played baseball through college, and I don't work in analytics now. High Five!

Please help to educate me on what I'm missing. You should buy a baseball team, because you've found an edge so significant and no one else in the game has seen it; MANAGERS are underpaid and much more important to wins and losses than anyone in the game thinks. Get your bids in!

Then why do you even post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, KonerkoFan1 said:

I stated why he's at fault for the losses and it's a simple equation.

Can you tell me why he deserves credit for tmanager. Simply because they won? Not even all those games are won because the manager made good decisions.

In that mindset, any team over .500 has a good manager.

The bad argumentation is only your own.

It's not a simple equation. 

Show me the equation bud. Show me what impact he had on the expected run rate and the expected win rate by going with one pitcher instead of the other down the stretch. Show me how many runs that would equal and what one run equals to your expected W/L over the course of a season.

I love that you believe in your heart of hearts that you know, without a doubt, what the best statistical move is and that deviating from your view makes it wrong without a shadow of a doubt. 

You clearly don't grasp statistics while telling everyone how concrete your evidence is. Sequencing in baseball is entirely uncontrollable and 100% luck; this means that Renteria could make bad decisions and the sequencing could work in his favor, while he could make brilliant decisions and it could work against him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SonofaRoache said:

In the course of a full season, teams aren't going 100 percent to win every game. Players will rest more because of injury and fatigue, teams will be exposed to more injuries, you will take trips all over the country to play baseball, managers will have Sunday lineups, and they will see a wider range of teams and players that they may not be able to fully prepare for. We are comparing apples to oranges here.

But do remember that Joe Maddon got fired after a slump to end the regular season last year. You cannot slump to end the season because of terrible managerial decisions. If it happens, the manager could be fired. Why? Because at that time you are going all out to win the most important games. 

There were more injuries this season than the average amount of injuries that occur over a 162 game season.

Joe Maddon got fired because the Cubs had been stale - in their opinions - for a year+ and management wanted to light a fire under someones ass. Turns out the offense just wasn't good and it wasn't Joe's fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

To learn from brilliant minds like yourself.

It doesn't take brilliance, just common sense.

If you don't understand how simple decisions managers make or don't make affect the game then you probably don't process any information when actually watching a baseball game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, KonerkoFan1 said:

It doesn't take brilliance, just common sense.

If you don't understand how simple decisions managers make or don't make affect the game then you probably don't process any information when actually watching a baseball game.

For sure. In 10 years, if my son needs baseball lessons, I'll be sure to give you a call. Wouldn't want him learning from an uneducated, unathletic dork like myself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

It's not a simple equation. 

Show me the equation bud. Show me what impact he had on the expected run rate and the expected win rate by going with one pitcher instead of the other down the stretch. Show me how many runs that would equal and what one run equals to your expected W/L over the course of a season.

I love that you believe in your heart of hearts that you know, without a doubt, what the best statistical move is and that deviating from your view makes it wrong without a shadow of a doubt. 

You clearly don't grasp statistics while telling everyone how concrete your evidence is. Sequencing in baseball is entirely uncontrollable and 100% luck; this means that Renteria could make bad decisions and the sequencing could work in his favor, while he could make brilliant decisions and it could work against him. 

 You didn't read what I said at all.

There's no way for me to extrapolate what would have happened had Renteria not made bad decisions. Telling me I don't understand statistics because I can't extrapolate them from thin air is laughable to say the very least.

The point was that putting your team in the best position to win is what dictates fault or not. If you put your team in a good position and they lose, it's not your fault. Again I ASK: do you understand this?

If you seriously want to ask me for exact examples of Renteria failing to do that then we can be here all day.

Edited by KonerkoFan1
  • Like 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, SonofaRoache said:

The good stetches happened against the Royals, Tigers, and Pirates. Although other teams lost more to them, we matched up well and feasted on them. We went 13 and 22 against .500 teams. We went 7 and 13 against the top two teams in our division. This cannot be viewed as great accomplishment. We can appreciate the season being an overall success, but nothing special. 

The struggles came at the worst time as we were trying to win a division championship and a playoff series. Managers get fired for these types of performances, especially when they may be viewed as the norm. If we are being honest, the Sox and Ricky struggled more than the last 10 games of the season. Ricky in particular made poor decisions throughout the year He was credited by the front office for the team's success as Hahn said Ricky deserves to enjoy our success and to be a part of it. Ricky was so bad the last two and a half weeks that he coached himself out of any chance of being here next year. 

KC was a .500 team against the rest of baseball. Detroit nearly was. The record vs .500 teams thing is deceptive this season, as one team was single handedly responsible for that, making it look like they sucked against everyone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

For sure. In 10 years, if my son needs baseball lessons, I'll be sure to give you a call. Wouldn't want him learning from an uneducated, unathletic dork like myself. 

Your lashing out in tantrums rather than attempting to understand is telling.

 

To literally admit you know nothing of metrics or managing impact while professing an uneducated opinion about those things is absurd. How can you profess opinions on things you admit you don't understand?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, KonerkoFan1 said:

Your lashing out in tantrums rather than attempting to understand is telling.

 

To literally admit you know nothing of metrics or managing impact while professing an uneducated opinion about those things is absurd. How can you profess opinions on things you admit you don't understand?

My goodness, some things just go right over peoples heads.

What tantrum?

Edited by Look at Ray Ray Run

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, KonerkoFan1 said:

Your lashing out in tantrums rather than attempting to understand is telling.

 

To literally admit you know nothing of metrics or managing impact while professing an uneducated opinion about those things is absurd. How can you profess opinions on things you admit you don't understand?

To spare the rest of us, He's mocking you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

My goodness, some things just go right over peoples heads.

What tantrum?

You completely ignored my points and merely played victim, and did nothing else with the post. The comment about your son to make me look like a bad guy was silly. And shows you can't handle the argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

To spare the rest of us, He's mocking you.

Either way he's conceding defeat without saying it. I'm not exactly seeing solid analysis.

Edited by KonerkoFan1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, southsider2k5 said:

To spare the rest of us, He's mocking you.

It's FRIDAY SS2k, and I'm taking a 3 day weekend after finishing up the midterms of my masters, and completing my first week with the new job! It's going to be soxtalk troll city today!!!!!!!! Get your popcorn ready!

All jokes aside, please no La Russa. 

BOCHY! BOCHY! BOCHY!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my thoughts:

Ricky: Fine manager, I do think he did an okay job. You can't really fault him for any of the previous years - he was given some AAAA players to work with. Now I didn't always agree with his bullpen management -- that being said find me a manager where you DO agree with it. I never liked his weird bunting stuff ... that was odd. Overall I also wish he was a little more flexible, but that's probably more of a me thing. i'd likely be much more like Joe Maddon as a manager - meaning I'd be moving guys all over the field a bit more ... try a Moncada in RF, Vaughn, McCann, etc. I understand if i was hte manager that would get shit on too. But I would've liked a bit more free thinking

LaRussa: You don't win as much as him by mistake. He probably could be a fine manager and I don't think without the benefit of being behind the scenes and in the interviews that we really know enough about him. LIke all we're doing is sitting at home projecting that he won't be able to change with the times. Maybe, and maybe that's the part we dont like, that it's not proven. But he's done it in the past & i'd have to think Hahn and Co would have the ability to decipher if he can embrace change like we hope he will. If he gets hired and he's hawk with the TWTW, then i mean, it's a disaster. 

Hinch: We all know the positives and negatives. Same with Cora. Basically, to me, would these guys have had the same success without the cheating? we dont know and we cant really quantify that. So, to me, it's almost as big of a risk as can LaRussa adapt to todays culture? Probably less of a concern, but still a negative check mark

Everybody else: AJ Pierzynksi - i'd personally love it, however I wonder how his personality may mesh.. plus first timer... i'd like to see him on the bench as a coach maybe earning his stripes.

To me, why aren't there more qualified options? I don't want anybody with a preexisting negative coming into the process. Seems like w this talent we should be able to find a manager who checks all the boxes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, KonerkoFan1 said:

You completely ignored my points and merely played victim, and did nothing else with the post. The comment about your son to make me look like a bad guy was silly. And shows you can't handle the argument.

Guy, I don't have a son. I was just messin' around. Lighten up, Francis.

I presented my point multiple times; if you haven't grasped it yet, that's on you. Have a great weekend my man.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kyyle23 said:

I had to change the title.  It looked like it was written by a bot in a reddit subforum 

Aw. No more Dr Seuss meets a crack binge? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Guy, I don't have a son. I was just messin' around. Lighten up, Francis.

I presented my point multiple times; if you haven't grasped it yet, that's on you. Have a great weekend my man.

And I invalidated that point easily and you've had no follow-up.

 

Third time I will ask you this:

A manager is at fault if he doesn't put his team in the best position to win and they lose. If he puts them in the best position and they lose, it's not his fault.

Do you understand?

Not answering a question would indicate you don't have the answer or have to much pride to have to admit you missed it. 

So far the few people that have really come at me lecture me about things that they fail to explain. You can't say someone doesn't grasp something then fail to explain it. Little Dunning-Kruger effect there. 

Edited by KonerkoFan1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×