cwsox

if the Jack Morris no hitter against us is any guide, a lot of people in the stands will start cheering against us and for the no hitter - that really pissed me off then and it will piss me off tonight if it happens

thanks for the correction! would be nice to win a no hitter again

Jack Morris did it to us once and I was screaming at him the entire time - the Yankess did it to us in what 94, sometime in the 90s but we won 4-0 if I recall - what the f*** is we go down this inning with 6 pitches? do our players have somewhere to go after the game?

I wonder what the modern era record is for 1-0 loses in a season

would be nice to see that hit now - how many swings on the first pitch have we done this game?

Heather, great play by play - thanks!

1) Who will win the series (CHW/ANA) (2 points)? Sox 2) Which bullpen will issue more walks (CHW/ANA) (2 points)? Sox 3) How many errors will the Sox make (4 points)? 1 4) How many basehits will Jon Garland allow (4 points)? 7 5) What will Joe Crede's average be after the series (.002 either way) (5 points)? .251 6) How many different Sox players will have a multi-hit game during the series (5 points)? 5 7) Who will lead the Sox in doubles (4 points)? Mags 8) Will someone on the Sox get a save (Y/N) (2 points)? yes 9) Who will be in 2nd place in the AL Central after the series (2 points)? Sox 10) Will Tim Salmon hit a homerun (Y/N) (2 points)? no TIEBREAKER: Attendance on Monday night 22,679

I honestly do not. 2001 was a year of many injures and yet JM held the team together. 2002 we slumped and JM ralied them magnificantly so we could be in better shape in 2003. 2003 is not over with so I haven't drawn any conclusions yet. I am none too pleased with a 1-5 road trip. I am also none too pleased with the performances of Koch, Colon, PK, Jose, a whole team that is hitting 25-100 points lower than they should, and, not that jacked about MB having struggled either. The players bear responsibility for what they do bat and ball in hand.

crede

score?

Schueler told him it might be a good idea that he took the job. Torborg himself relayed this several years ago. He was going to stay, even though he is from the NY area, but when Schueler told him that he knew what he had to do. you have a link or source for that - I am not challenging you - that is new information to me and I'd like to read it

I have never understood the firing of Lamont. It was wildly popular with the fans but it never made any sense whatsoever to me. I also totally disagree that Torborg was shown the door. We wanted him, Torborg wanted out himself. Losing Torborg was sorely on Torborg, not at all on the Sox.

pinned this one just to bring us luck

It doesn't really matter if they are technically poles or quizzes. They are a chance to think of our current manager in terms of his predecessors. I believe that was the intent of the posts. Of course judging a current manage in terms of former managers does require a extensive knowledge of those former managers besides just their won loss pct. I personally do not believe Jerry Manuel is either in the top half dozen or bottom half dozen when compared to the team's former managers. He seems an average manager somewhere in the middle of the pack. and give credit to at46 who alone got the point, and as well, the conclusion that was sought -

that fact that his average is better than any of those managers - and I could have doubled that list had the software allowed me - says what? If you studied the actual won-loss % of managers on or team and other teams, you might be surprized. JM has been more than successful at what he has done.

CK, I could have used a lot of names other than Bevingingtons. I am not a diehard JM supporter byt so much of the criticism of him is, IMHO, shrill, not based on history, and is demagoguery. I say that even thoguh I value you as friend highly - your opinions on JM have been so visceral from th begnnning - as of others - that any valid points that are being made (if any) are lost in the din. Then to argue that when the team wins it is "despite manuel" but when it loses it is "because of Manuel" is, buddy, not very convincing, reminds of cubs fans arguing or 10 year olds trying to make a point. You can't say any good is not to his credit and any bad it is to his detriment. I have my frustrations with JM. My point is that he has done a job for us better than a lot of others. He may or may not need to at the end of the season. But that decision I trust will be made by cooler, more analyticial and informed heads that ours.

1. you seriously suggesting that JM could have done what Phil Jackson did? 2. JM took over an inept team from Bevington and made them good. Like it or not, Jerry has contibuted a lot to the Sox. Make the critiques, just make them fom a place where you may rationally convince someone else, if you wish to be effectve. If your desire is just to join the mindless "Jerry sucks" cacauphony, then, achieve that. curious though that JM was here (thus far) less time than a lot of praised former managers and yet achieved more wins than a lot of them.

I don't

Yes exactly this team has been a big disappointment 3 years in a row now, Manuel is an AWFUL manager. I disagree - but then I think Koch is 44 and my man AR is 33 so what do I know?

the all time 4th winningest manager in WS history did not get those wns by being "terrible" or an "idiot" or any of the other overblown rhetorical thinsg tossed his way. For what he has done, he deserves our respect. Now: if is he not accomplishing what he should with this team, debate that by all means, debate any way one wants really, my point is simply that the language on JM gets overdone dramatically to the point of overkill. I could be persuaded a change needs to be made after the season if he do not achieve - realism says a change will not be made now - but I would so welcome a calm, dispassionate, discussion on our manaher, does he have shortcomings (and they all do) and all they fatal to this team.... ,,, with respect for a'' that he has given us a lot and KM deserves that repsect even if a change needs to be made at some point.

no

what a typo!!!! yes, I meant fared well! thanks for catching it!

and Sat is right - JM is 4th all time wins as manager of the Sox - that was the trick question -

Tony LaRussa [ 2 ] [28.57%] .504 Russ Blackburn [ 0 ] [0.00%] .427 Terry Bevington [ 1 ] [14.29%] .509 Eddie Stankey [ 0 ] [0.00%] .511 Chuck Tanner [ 0 ] [0.00%] .492 Ed Walsh [ 0 ] [0.00%] .333 Jim Fregosi [ 1 ] [14.29%] ,461 Ted Lyons [ 1 ] [14.29%] .430 Lew Fonseca [ 1 ] [14.29%] .377 Jimmy Dykes [ 1 ] [14.29%] .489 JM is at, as sat noted, .512

I didn't intend that any of the choices have a better percentage - that was my point, that JM has fared well for us with wins and winning %. Posters may and will disagree with some his moves, but the total attacks upon him as being incompetent and stupid are historically and intellectually invalid - the man may have to go or not, but deserves respect for being one of the top managers we have ever had in terms of total wins and winning percentage, and winning a division championship.