Rex Hudler

So where would Wily Mo Pena play? How does he help the Sox?

Ditto........ It is good to see them get one. They have sucked bad the last few years.

I have not read it completely, just excerpts and reviews. I was not trying to say that there was not good information in the book, just that most believe there was a lot of sensationalism in how it was portrayed. I believe there is definite credence to those principles, but there is so much more that goes into evaluating a player. There will never be a time when you can effectively evaluate players without watching them play or worrying about their tools. If you go strictly by a players baseball skills and don't worry about projecting how much they can improve, you will have a team full of Mark Ellis' and Frank Menechino's. You can't win with ALL role players.

Bonds didn't beat the Sox.

Question asked and I hear you: so what did happen when Baylor was fired - same major market, this time owned by a major corporate news machine - with a hell of a lot higher attendance than the Sox - now if Jackson was going to make an issue, why not then? Or why not when Jackson was still building a name for himself in chicago in his young radical days and the Sox let go of a black manager? That is answer. Hell, most days I want Wally B or someone else to amnage and I want KW's ass out of here. Firing is not the problem. And as it has not been for Jackson, nor will it be now. Could be lost of things. Perhaps because it was well known that when the Cubs fired Baylor their first choice was Baker?? Why did Jackson try and get involved in the decision of the hiring of the football coach at Alabama? Do you think Sylvester Croom asked Jesse to champion his cause? If you want answers to why Jackson does what he does, and how he chooses his spots, you'll have to ask him. But to completely ignore the possible ramifications of a situation he could potentially get involved in is naive. There is nothing wrong with wondering if he could become an issue.

Moneyball has had Billy Beane backtracking with a lot of baseball executives. It is widely believed that the book overstated his methods because of the author's fascination with Beane. He talks about how Beane calls clubs stupid for drafting HS players, when arguably his best position player was a HS draftee (Chavez), which of course it fails to mention. There were other ommissions of contradictions to their "new approach" as well, but I can't recall them off the top of my head. The book and the media along with it seems to portray Beane as a guy who came up with some "new concept" that no one had ever heard of. That is completely laughable. Perhaps they emphasize certain stats more, but it's not like they re-invented the wheel here.

I agree that race should not be an issue and that it may not even be one. It may have nothing to do at all with what goes into the decision-making process and I truly hope it is not. But I do think that it is fair to wonder aloud if it does have any bearing, especially with a Major event that will shine the public light directly on the Sox and the city of Chicago. That's what PR departments do. They discuss all possible ramifications of an action, whether right or wrong, politically correct or incorrect, reasonable or ridiculous. Then decisions are made. So whether the Sox are basing anything on that concept or even discussing it, I feel it is reasonable to think it is possible. Do I think that would be the only factor in a decision, one way or the other?? NO

CW, I think you are off here. I don't think anyone is worried about color at all. They are only worried if Jesse Jackson will try to make it out to be something it is not. I don't think it is out of line to say that Jackson has stuck his nose in situations before that seemed completely ludicrous. No one is saying that being an African-American is why they would let him go. The question was asked is "Could the Sox fear a reprisal from a recently more active Jesse Jackson?". With the All-Star Game approaching, I think it is more than fair to wonder how anything you do would be perceived from a PR status. The Sox may not even be thinking that way at all, but it seems reasonable to question the possibility.

Cron took over the job Nick Leyva had the last two years. He is a Minor League Bunting Instructor/Rookie League Manager. He spends the first half of the season roving to the different affiliates. I wouldn't consider it a drop because it is more of a Minor League Staff position. If he were only the Great Falls Manager and didn't begin work until now, then yes, you could say it would be a backward move.

I can only name about 5 cities in Montana, that just happens to be one of them. ;-)

Purvis had elbow surgery last year (Tommy John, I think). His first outing was bad. Last night he threw 2 scoreless innings, but I didn't see him pitch. Not sure if there was an outing in between the two or not.

Ulacia walked a hitter with the bases loaded and in frustration punched the mound while still in follow through position. Not sure how long he is out, but there was some kind of fracture. I heard he may begin throwing again soon on the side, so it may not be that bad, but I am not sure.

Montana

Could hosting the All-Star Game have any bearing? Would Reinsdorf consider it worse PR by firing Manuel than keeping him?

In a way you can say we are both right, depending on the point you are trying to make. I don't agree with Brando's comparison, but the bottom line is that right now, Reed does have better numbers than Mauer and is probably a year closer to the Big Leagues even though they are both at the same level.

First of all, I don't see any way possible that Wally will be in Charlotte next year. He has nothing left to prove at the Minor League level. If he is not a Major League manager next year, my guess is he will be a 3B coach for someone. I have no doubts whatsoever that Wally is qualified and capable of managing in the Major Leagues right now. What I do doubt is how Wally would fit with Kenny Williams as the GM. That just seems like an "oil and water" combination to me. I think Wally has actually done a better job with the Barons this year than he did last year when they won it (if that is possible). The talent level this year is just not there. He is playing with basically 8 guys on offense because he is hamstrung with having to play Josh Shaffer (.196 with 0HR, 8RBI and only 4BB in 47 games plus 15 errors). There is no league MVP candidate (Miles), no position player primed for the Majors (Olivo) and not as much speed as last year. The pitching has been pretty solid, but the rotation is in shambles with Cotts, Malone, and Ulacia all on the DL, making other guys step out of their normal roles. Clay Eason who was the perfect spot starter last year is in AAA. The bullpen has been good, but I don't think you can say it was solid or as deep as last year, when it was superb. All that said, and this will depend on personnel of course, Wally manages aggressively. His teams sometimes run into "dumb" outs, but they also create runs. With him, you have to take the bad with the good and trust the good will far outweight the bad. So far here in Birmingham, it definitely has.

I thought JM made the move for Marte, then Alou countered with Aurilia to hit for Bernard? That is exactly what happened. I didn't see, I was just basing it on what I read in other posts. If that is the case, then Manuel could have done nothing else. You can't change pitchers again. Marte had to pitch to Aurilia.

Would have worked much better, Past, if you would have done it like this... ManueLLLLLLLLL

If Manuel brings in Marte to face Bonds and he gives up the HR, then Manuel looks stupid for replacing a guy who had dominated Bonds all night. Why can't you just chalk it up to Colon making a bad pitch and Bonds being a good hitter?? And there is NO way you walk Bonds and put the tying run on base with no one out. Lastly, if Jerry brings in Koch to face Aurilia, then Alou counters with a left-handed hitter. The bottom line is the Sox lost and the Giants won. There is no one to blame. If you want to blame Manual for everything, go for it. But you are off base here, Past. With the results that happened last night, there is no way he could win.

Like someone said, a lot of high school players develop their "pop" after a couple of years in the minors. Also, a catcher hitting .300 and playing solid D is much harder to find than a CF playing solid D and hitting .300. You just don't find offensive catchers that can play D too often. Mauer's power will develop. I can't think of many high school outfielders that hit for a lot of power right away. Typically its two to three or even four years down the line when they start developing home run power. Basically its as they fill. But that's the crux of my point: by the time Mauer develops (I should "IF" because a future HOF player is not as impressive as I thought he'd be in his 3rd ml year, against his peers) to be Pirzinki's superior, we will have a Democrat running this country. Meanwhile, Prior began his dominating ways right away. As a Sox fan I am happy about tha as I am about Reed's performance, which is clearly better right now than Mauer's. Hehe. Prior was also still in college at the same point Mauer is right now. You have to be able to understand how to differentiate between someone who had three years of Division I experience and someone coming out of high school. If you are trying to compare a half season's stats for two guys at the same level with that big of a difference in experience (not even factoring that the HS kid is from a cold weather state), then you are comparing apples to oranges. If it will make you happy, I will concede that Reed's numbers for this first half of the season are indeed better than Mauer's. One could argue that relative to their position that is not necessarily true, but I will give that to you as well, because of how great Reed's numbers are. So if that was your point, then you win. But I just can't understand trying to compare the two. I still don't get the point in doing so. Both seem to be on track to make an impact in the Major Leagues.

Yep, obviously he knows more than we do and all professional scouts and baseball operations people. If they are only right 30% of the time, then Brando why don't you give it a shot? You'll be right 10, maybe 15% of the time?? If you're lucky, that is.

Good thing you aren't the person he needs to impress. And those that actually work in the game and make a living evaluating guys feel differently than you do. I'm sure he's relieved about that.

Both players are doing very well. But by your numbers in bold it looks like you were trying to make a statement that Reed is much better. That is obviously open to interpretation, but considering Mauer is two years younger, playing at the same level and plays a more difficult position, I don't see much validity in your point. Reed's numbers are quite impressive and Sox fans should be excited about his development. But to have a left-handed hitting catcher that is barely 20 years old and putting up those kind of numbers is very rare. I'd like to have both, but don't ask me to choose which I'd rather have.

So what's your point?

I agree on your last post abozichiu. I don't think Mark chose his words very well, but I do feel it was out of frustration that he said it. I am sure he was frustrated and spoke, not really thinking about how his words would be perceived. As long as he doesn't keep making comments like those and it was a one-time thing, I don't think a big deal should be made about it.