shoota

Golden sombrero? Que?

QUOTE(Wealz @ Sep 2, 2006 -> 07:39 PM) Look at the starters' ERA. (Even) Tom Kelly couldn't win with this rotation. You're not counting the games lost because of Ozzie's decision to start Mack in center over BA, his poor bullpen usage (like bringing in Cotts and Riske before any one of his 4 better bullpen pitchers, his use of Politte), using the starters too long, Podsednik, and you're assuming TK wouldn't have used McCarthy in the rotation. So despite the starters' ERAs, Ozzie has lost a number of games that could have been won had he managed better. I'm banking that the better manager, Tom Kelly, would not have made the same simple mistakes OG did, and thus the Sox would have more wins.

QUOTE(Wealz @ Sep 2, 2006 -> 07:36 PM) Tom Kelly also found a cure for the common cold. Classic avoiding-the-topic response because of one's inability to disprove another's claim.

QUOTE(Frankensteiner @ Sep 2, 2006 -> 07:28 PM) So Kelly was managing that team for what, one year? You can follow an organization closely but it does not compare to following the team every day, like I'm sure you do with the Sox. My point is that most of the problems we have with Ozzie (stuff about favorites, Mackowiak in CF, sticking with Pods) are things that are evident only from watching the Sox on a daily basis. I'm sure if you ask Twins fans, they'll have a list of peeves with Kelly as well. It's also common knowledge that 2002-present Twins players didn't like Kelly all that much and began winning only after Gardenhire took over. Sure, I'd have more insight into TK the manager if I followed the Twins as closely as I do the Sox, but even from what I've seen from TK, Gardenhire and that organization is a much more sound, fundamental, better philosophy of baseball than I've seen from the Sox over the same time period. IIRC, TK handpicked Gardenhire to be his successor because they shared the same philosophies of how to manage a club. There's similarities between TK and Gardenhire that make so much more sense than the brand of baseball Ozzie Guillen practices. All I need to see is the play from different personnel year after year, and the TK and Gardenhire-managed Twins teams are always playing smarter baseball than the Sox. If you incorporate the Sox's 3-4-5 power with the Twins brand of baseball, the Sox would be a much better team, and probably leading the AL Central.

QUOTE(Wealz @ Sep 2, 2006 -> 07:21 PM) You really like Tom Kelly. You do too, judging from your lack of responses challenging my claim that TK is the better manager than your boy Ozzie Guillen.

QUOTE(Frankensteiner @ Sep 2, 2006 -> 07:19 PM) Unless you followed the Minnesota Twins day-to-day for the last 20 years, you can't possibly know any of this. I've followed their organization and TK closely since 2001. They are a well-run organization that practices everything I listed.

QUOTE(Wealz @ Sep 2, 2006 -> 07:10 PM) You're describing God, not Tom Kelly. I was describing Tom Kelly, a man whose baseball managing abilities are far superior to Ozzie's. And for those who say Ozzie is a manager whose best assest is motivating his players, he's inferior to TK in that aspect too. TK gets his players to do the little things to win games because they know they will be replaced if they don't. There's no greater motivation than staying in the majors.

QUOTE(Wealz @ Sep 2, 2006 -> 06:57 PM) Last year's team was predicted to be middle-of-the-pack. Nonetheless, two seasons managing, 1 World Series title isn't a bad rate of success for Guillen. Past success has no influence on present performance. The question isn't "who has a better resume," but "who's more likely to win now." The right answer is Tom Kelly. He would allow our 3-4-5 to rake and give our bottom of the order a pirana-like attack. He wouldn't have Mack in center, wouldn't put up with a struggling Pods, would make better decisions with the pitching staff, and have the Sox playing sound fundamental baseball. TK wouldn't publicly rip into a rookie pitcher for not doing Vazquez's dirty work, wouldn't have put Marte on the playoff roster over McCarthy, and had he managed this team, would have had us leading the Central by now. EDIT: And TK is above playing favorites unlike Ozzie, and would put the team's success above personal relationships.

QUOTE(Wealz @ Sep 2, 2006 -> 06:50 PM) What's Kelly's winning percentage? In your opinion, is Tom Kelly or Ozzie Guillen the better manager?

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Sep 2, 2006 -> 06:49 PM) Then Tom Kelly should be the manager of the White Sox. He has 2 WS titles, so he must be twice the manager Ozzie is. I like the way you think. I've been on the TK bandwagon for some time now. Join us.

QUOTE(G&T @ Sep 2, 2006 -> 06:30 PM) Yeah but MB might give up 5 or 6. And until that happens, I won't sweat it.

Meh, one run will not win this game. Go Sox.

QUOTE(Wealz @ Sep 2, 2006 -> 02:51 PM) Just remember, whoever McCarthy replaces in the rotation this year, we're stuck with next year. Play for the present. Worry about tomorrow, tomorrow. When it's September and your team is tied for the Wild Card lead, you play to win now.

QUOTE(Cloudyguy09 @ Sep 2, 2006 -> 02:23 PM) I never thought frank was done, i knew he had a couple years left in him as long as he didnt break any more bones. Im afraid hes going to kill us in the playoffs, just like earlier in the season. I just hope thome, konerko, and dye can outslug him. Which they most likely will. Yeah, Thomas could kill us if he goes 0-9 again like he did in the 2000 ALDS. "But it was the shadows! I couldn't see."

I replied to this article when Heads posted it in the postgame thread, so I'll add it here too: Mackowiak has earned even more respect from me. He's telling Ozzie and us fans that he shouldn't be playing center field with regularity! Not only did he say his center field defense was "horrible," he specifically mentioned Brian by name and how he's a better option. This is exactly how Mack should handle this situation. He can't insult his manager saying he's foolish to start him over BA, he can't go to Ozzie and tell him to play him over Podsednik in Left. He respectfully made his point to Ozzie and us fans, that he's trying his best but thinks the team's better with BA starting. The way he handled it offers the best chance at changing the situation for the better. Well done Mack. QUOTE(Jordan4life_2006 @ Sep 2, 2006 -> 02:13 PM) If anything I see Ozzie playing him there more out of spite. This makes Ozzie look bad when the player himself is telling you he's being put in a position to fail. I can totally see that. Ozzie hasn't matured past this elementary behavior. He will cite some a mi manera bulls***.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Sep 2, 2006 -> 01:18 AM) From Macks own mouth... "I've been horrible, actually," Mackowiak said. "There's no point in lying or candy-coating anything. It's been bad. "I don't know if it's not being out there much in your career and you get out there and you are overexposed. Before, I would play one [game] in right, one in center and maybe play third. But when you go out there on a daily basis, you see the stuff you need to work on to get better at a certain position." It's something I need to work on in the winter and try to get better defensively, because it has been absolutely terrible this year," Mackowiak said. "My routes are not as crisp as a guy like Brian's are. You are taking banana routes to balls and it becomes a struggle. "You continue to keep trying to get better, but it's frustrating because it's an important position up the middle to have good defense. It's frustrating to not do your best out there and that it sometimes hurts the team." Maybe Ozzie should read the f***ing paper, and keep Mack out of center. The only one who thinks Mack can play CF seems to be Ozzie only. Mackowiak has earned even more respect from me. He's telling Ozzie and us fans that he shouldn't be playing center field with regularity! Not only did he say his center field defense was "horrible," he specifically mentioned Brian by name and how he's a better option. This is exactly how Mack should handle this situation. He can't insult his manager saying he's foolish to start him over BA, he can't go to Ozzie and tell him to play him over Podsednik in Left. He respectfully made his point to Ozzie and us fans, that he's trying his best but thinks the team's better with BA starting. The way he handled it offers the best chance at changing the situation for the better. Well done Mack.

QUOTE(Steff @ Sep 1, 2006 -> 11:49 PM) If I said they didn't deserve criticism, you might have a point. You said: "Hysterical.. you give Kenny a pass.. someone that sat in an office while the players played their asses off.. but you won't give the actual guys that did all the work some slack." I took "slack" as meaning criticizing less, but I'll adjust my previous post because of your objection: I was teaching you why your logic was faulty. A smart GM doesn't lose his intelligence like a player loses his physical skills. To say a presently underperforming player deserves slack because of his past accomplishments is folly.

QUOTE(Steff @ Sep 1, 2006 -> 10:52 PM) Oh, there was no need for me to make one. I think you did it perfectly.

QUOTE(Steff @ Sep 1, 2006 -> 11:37 PM) So Kenny's intelligence won us the WS least year...? Alrighty. I was teaching you why your logic was faulty. A smart GM doesn't lose his intelligence like a player loses his physical skills. To say a presently underperforming player doesn't deserve criticism because of his past accomplishments is folly.

QUOTE(Wealz @ Sep 1, 2006 -> 11:37 PM) Sources that he's hurt? I don't know, going from a 17-game win streak to losing velocity, altering his arm angle to relieve pain, and getting lit up routinely should be enough source.

QUOTE(Steff @ Sep 1, 2006 -> 11:29 PM) Hysterical.. you give Kenny a pass.. someone that sat in an office while the players played their asses off.. but you won't give the actual guys that did all the work some slack. Players need their physical skills to perform; front office baseball men only need their intelligence. If a player doesn't have the physical skills to produce, he has little value to the present team. If a smart GM makes a bad trade amongst many good ones, he has great value to his team since he's likely to build more championship-caliber teams.

QUOTE(Wealz @ Sep 1, 2006 -> 11:07 PM) You're wrong. What's hurting the team is the high-priced starting rotation. Sure, the starting rotation has hurt the Sox more than Ozzie's bad decisions and talent evaluations, but you can't say Ozzie hasn't costed the Sox wins.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Sep 1, 2006 -> 11:04 PM) I havent made it past the screener on 2 ocassions. LOL What's the phone number?

QUOTE(Steff @ Sep 1, 2006 -> 10:49 PM) The analogy fits just fine. Those that go there have a choice. They don't seem to have an issue buying beer from a baseball fan that knows more about the Sox than half the nit wits on this site and can carry on an intelligent conversation. Because you choose not to support him with a inept reason speaks volumes. Next time you're at the cell think before you buy a beer, soda, hot dog, etc.... most of the vendors are Cub fans and you are supporting them with every sip and bite. Don't quite understand what that has to do with my question.... Apparently not. I guess next time I am in the Wrigley area I shouldn't buy any beer.. or when I go to Baltimore, or NY, or Detroit, etc... Crazy. The other bars and restaurants you're referring to don't operate under false allegiance by targeting the White Sox organization and fans, which is exactly what Jimbos does. Confirm you understand the difference.

QUOTE(Dan @ Sep 1, 2006 -> 10:47 PM) shoot, you get banned from WSI again? The last time I was banned was months ago. Probably sometime in March or April when I registered here. Who are you at WSI?