caulfield12

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Oct 7, 2011 -> 08:52 PM) Worse shape than 2001? You mean that great team that didn't win a damn thing. We're not in nearly as bad of shape as you make it out to be. We're relatively young and still have strong pitching. For a team that has such an awful system we'll have a bunch of contributions from players that spent time in said system. I'm not a fan of where we're at, but it's nowhere near as dire as this site makes it out to be. In fact, if a couple things go our way next year, I wouldn't be shocked to see the Sox overtake the Tigers. They're good but hardly a Juggernaut. Now I understand wju that hyperbole thread was a sticky. BTW, I know its easy to forget but there is that thing we did a few years ago that nearly 90 years of Sox players and GM's failed to accomplish. However, if you subtract Buehrle AND Danks OR Floyd, that rotation goes from a strength to a definite weakness. Then Chris Sale simply HAS to quickly evolve into the next Randy Johnson...and not break down like Liriano somewhere in the process. As far as 2005 goes, the statute of limitations for the majority of the fanbase has already passed. Expectations have increased, and you can both blame and credit KW for that. Most of the posters here aren't expecting a competitive team before 2014. So, if they're not at least .500 in 2014, are you still going to cite 2005 as the reason to retain KW? Just curious. What has he done in the last 3 years to give Sox fans a reason for hope? I hope it's something more than Humber, Santos, Sale and Viciedo!!!

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 7, 2011 -> 09:34 PM) The close trusted advisors he's worked with the last 5 years manage high school. So you're going to be like Greg backing Ozzie...in terms of now being stuck in the "firmly set in your belief in the unlikelihood of Ventura succeeding" camp for the next 2 seasons? UGH. The White Sox have done some HORRIBLE things since I've been following the team in the early 1980's. Despite all of these, I've never wavered in my "fandom" or questioned my choice of favorite team...nor drank myself into a stupor as a result of aforementioned decisions/moves. I hope you can start to look on the bright side and find a few things to be optimistic about (like the bench coach or new hitting coach) or it's going to be a LONG 2-3 years for all of us (picking on JR, pleading for him to sell the team or worse...KW...and eventually Robin).

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 7, 2011 -> 08:40 PM) F From all the interviews, it doesn't seem like Robin is really involved in choosing coaches. He should have at least ONE guy he's VERY (personally) comfortable working with...like Maddon has Martinez. Obviously, he's probably on good terms with Harold and Cooper, but is that enough? Think if you were named to run a company, wouldn't you bring at least one close and trusted advisor with you instead of letting all of the terms and conditions of your staff be dictated by that future employer?

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Oct 7, 2011 -> 08:33 PM) Some of you guys are so over the top it's hilarious. It's like we're the Orioles or Indians over here. The fact of the matter is that we've spent (wasted) a TON of money from 2006-2011. The Tigers have spent the same or more, but at least they have a World Series appearance and another ALCS (or more). Of course, they also came up short against the Twins in 2006 and 2009 in terms of winning the division. Say whatever you want, but they had enough of a minor league system to acquire Cabrera, Dombrowski chose perfectly with Victor Martinez (instead of Dunn) and then the two key acquisitions of Fister and Delmon Young helped to put that team over the top. They finished 38-16 and we are currently MILES behind them. Maybe not 15 games, but nobody will be surprised if we're predicted to finish 8-12 game back and in 3rd/4th place at the beginning of 2012. As far as being like the Indians, that's not the worst approach to be taking. Anything is better than the Orioles or Astros, who have been stuck between rebuilding and holding onto some of their aging veterans/journeymen. You could probably name 5-7 organizations we're clearly in better shape in (especially considering our advantage due to the Chicago market), but we're not in better shape than when KW took over the team in 2001, either.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=ArKs..._rookies_100511 I think it's worthwhile to look at this article as it really frames what we should be looking at as Ventura fills out the rest of his coaching staff...if the D-Backs can go from 65-97 to one inning away from the NLCS, then it's obviously possible for the White Sox to contend again as well. Unfortunately, DET has Verlander/Scherzer/Porcello/Fister/Jacob Turner all signed through 2014. Of course, we looked like we had our own pitching dynasty set-up for 2-3 years after 2005 and that fell apart soon enough.

You'd think ONE of them might be a guy who Ventura's familiar with from the last 7-8 years living in SoCal. Someone from the Angels, Dodgers, Padres...just a guess.

http://espn.go.com/dallas/mlb/story/_/id/7...-thinking-brawl The inevitable Nolan Ryan article with Ventura being named Sox manager...

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Oct 7, 2011 -> 06:59 PM) When it's all said and done, people are going to say that KW was, at one point, a very good GM and that he got caught up in making splashes and "flying under the radar" so much that it overtook his baseball acumen and ruined his ability to be a GM. And that the "riverboat gambler" side of him lost out in a series of bad moves at the end of his tenure. Perhaps from the bigger perspective, he'll be most remembered as a GM whose goal (while not often accomplished) was to put the White Sox in a position to compete every season, particularly from July until the end of the season. It's a bit ironic that with all of the hype for his trades and mid-season "tinkering," it was only in 2005 and 2008 that he actually succeeded, and adding Geoff Blum (in 05) was perhaps one of the most under-the-radar moves of his entire tenure. Maybe the vanishing dream of the "Sox decade" in Chicago with the collapse of the 2006 team and the freefall in 07. Finally, the last 3 years of acrimony with Ozzie, punctuated by the Dunn/Rios/Peavy/Swisher/Edwin Jackson moves.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 7, 2011 -> 06:08 PM) When she acted in Uncle Buck she played a high schooler but was really 20 so it's not creepy to ask you to watch that movie and look at her aged 20-30. She also remained a good looking woman into her 30s-40s but whatever. And she is a great singer as well as actor. How would you rate her compared to Mrs. Teahen?

QUOTE (Lemon_44 @ Oct 7, 2011 -> 07:25 PM) The most amazing thing to me in the Coop interview was right at the beginning. After OG signed his extension, he was asked about his assisstants and, according to Coop, Ozzie said let them sweat. I've been a defender of Ozzie but that's pretty bad, if true. I don't see what, or why, or how, that could be good for a team on any level. OG wuold always defend his coaches publicly as being hard workers, why would he want them to "sweat" waiting on a contract extension? And then all the lip service to motivating the team to finish 2nd instead of 3rd because of the coaches' families and that share would mean an extra $10,000 or something per coach...what a joke.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 7, 2011 -> 04:44 PM) My interpretation of this whole set of boondoggles is that it tells me KW really doesn't have decision making authority beyond a certain point. I think that the Chairman is basically running most everything. KW gives him 2 outlines last offseason, one "All in" and one "Cutting back" and the Chairman realizes that cutting back means Ozzie is gone...so he accepts KW's "All in" outline to try to save Ozzie. That's the only rational reason why I wouldn't have fired KW...if he hadn't made the decisions. And this managerial hiring screams of "you have contracted VDN" to me. The Chairman picked his manager in 04, gave him every opportunity to succeed with his own money, replaced him with another of his guys. And JR really could buy into the dysfunction of the organization being over-ridden by the additions of Dunn and Jesse Crain? Is/was he actually that naive?

Mid to late 2013...the results of "rebuilding" and Ventura's managing will be clear for all to see. Of course, if that's just putting off MORE rebuilding with a new manager and GM, it will suck, obviously. The only good thing that can possibly come of it is high "franchise-player" draft picks that actually succeed and rebuilding the minor league system. If it's just going to be Rick Hahn or someone else (as part of the plan KW prepared with JR the last 2-3 months), then it's silly that KW is the one in charge of it, except for JR's loyalty factor and the "fix the mess that you created" mentality. We'll see if KW really is "Chicago tough" when all of the focus of the media is on him and less on Ventura, because everyone knows who's 100% responsible for the current roster composition. And nobody is really going to expect a huge turnaround right off the bat because of Ventura's lack of experience. How that goes in line with generating revenue/season ticket sales for the Sox in 2012 and 2013...it's not clear exactly. We're hiring a manager who will "grow" on the job while how many times have we focused (and failed) getting off to hot or at least decent April starts the last three seasons???

QUOTE (bozzie @ Oct 7, 2011 -> 02:24 PM) Ah, those that have eyes, let them see . . . . . . I believe it was bozzie himself, yours truly, who spent all summer peeling back the curtains on the Kenny/Ozzie soap opera, and the pawns Ozzie used that were Dung and Rios; it all sprang from Ozzie's demand that Jim Thome be gone'd and Mark Kotsay be DH . . . and it all manifested itself and properly so in the jettisoning of the foul-mouthed, tamale-toting Guillen. Finally. But what did bozzie get for his advocacy? Banned from this board from the overzealous mods. I forgive you, mods. I know it's not easy to recognize the seer within your midst . . . "Advocacy" of what exactly? Second of all, instead of throwing out stereotypical or racist assertions, check out the national foods of Venezuela. Most would consider the tamale a Mexican food first and foremost, particularly because of its roots in the Aztec and Mayan/Guatemalan civilizations. It's really stretching it with the Incas, because they had very little presence in what is now modern-day Venezuela....more Colombia down south through Ecuador, the heart of the empire in Peru and northern Chile. Early Latin American civilizations were warring communities, and the idea of the tamale probably spread with traveling troops. The earliest record of the food is from 5000 BC, although they most likely were around earlier, perhaps as early as 7000 BC. The Mayans settled the modern-day Yucatan Peninsula while the Aztecs developed in the Valley of Mexico where Mexico City is currently. The Incan empire stretched from Columbia through Chile in South America. Function Corn, or maize, husks were first used. With fighting soldiers come very hungry stomachs. At first, women were brought to the war camps in order to make food for the warriors. Traditional meals could not be made quickly enough so the women created tamales. They could be made ahead of time, packed and easily transported, and quickly heated. Read more: Where Did Tamales Originate? | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/facts_7460870_did-tama...l#ixzz1a85BmECI

QUOTE (LVSoxFan @ Oct 7, 2011 -> 03:07 PM) I like this take. Which always goes back to what is considered his (Reinsdorf's) biggest flaw/weakness simultaneously, being TOO loyal. As Cooper mentioned, anyone who worked for an organization like that for as long as he had (26 years) would be "freaking crazy/insane" to want to go somewhere else...coming from someone whose sick, 85 year-old mother could have been minutes away from him in New York if he ended up with the Yankees' job. Ozzie's definitely not going to be given as much rope in Florida. Maybe if he goes back to managing to win and not simply in order to win a battle of internecine cock-fighting with his own GM, he can once again be an effective manager. Greg does have a point there. KW has come across as defensive, disappearing intentionally on a chaotic team when he was most needed and then offering to fall on the sword (for the umpteenth time) for a mess of his own creation. That doesn't inspire much confidence. Of course, he can argue he was trying to hide from the clubhouse/field to prevent further distractions to the team/clubhouse/chemistry, but that rings a little bit hollow. Then again, what he was actually going to be capable of doing to fix things while forced to hold onto Guillen as a manager, obviously a very difficult situation to be in for someone so proud. Which is obviously a large reason he chose to become scarce and was dinged for appearing in places off-the-field while Rome was burning, so to speak. Of course, Billy Beane often does/did the same type of thing. It's cute when the team is winning, it's irresponsible/neglectful when every aspect of the organization you're directing is going south.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Oct 7, 2011 -> 03:33 PM) 1 - Without looking at the stats of every team this year, weren't we close to the top in fielding %? Alexei is elite as SS, Beckham was great at 2B, PK is average at 1B, Morel is above average at 3B. AJ sucks with his arm but can block pitches and call a good game. Rios is supposed to be good in CF and Pierre is coming off a great year in the field and minus his arm he's always been able to cover ground. So the defense argument doesnt really hold. And the pitching has been our strength for a while so not real sure where you're going with that. 2 - You've been saying that forever but you have no idea. You are 100% speculating. 3 - Really? A GM who isn't forthcoming about pending deals/no deals at the trade deadline? Oh lord. None of those really point to KW lieing at all. Not liking him is one thing, and there are very valid reasons for doing so. But calling him a liar really doesn't hold much weight, especially using those "examples" Rios, at least on paper and in reality for most of 2009/10, was an improvement on the often-times horrible CF play we've seen when BA wasn't in there, post-2006. Quentin went through plantar fasciitis and was actually quite a bit better OF this year compared to 2010. Beckham moved off 3B and became one of the top 3 AL 2B defensively. To have promoted Flowers over AJ this season (and not signed AJ) would have been dubious at best if defensive ability was cited as the reason. Pierre wasn't good at all this year, but he wasn't bad in 2010 and was tons better than the first Sox version of Scotty Pods in 2005-06. And how many teams have stellar defensive LFer's with good throwing arms? LF isn't exactly known for that. The problem is we needed more OPS from that position if it was going to be a defensive sinkhole, especially with Pierre losing his speed/confidence on the basepaths this past year.

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/wh...ancona-fan.html This is the Cooper interview with the Sun-Times that he referenced in the radio interview that apparently KW wasn't too happy with...but AAL IZ WELL now.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 7, 2011 -> 05:38 AM) I don't see any in between with this move at the very least. Do you mean about Ventura failing/succeeding as a manager (ala Quade on the Northside) or the organization going full rebuilding or going for it yet again in 2012 with a modified "reload"? It seems only about 10-15% of the posters here are expecting anything above $100-105 million for payroll, and that was counting on the idea of Mark Buehrle probably coming back in those projections...at least that if any budget "stretching" was going to be done for 2012, it would be done to keep Mark in the fold.

Would rather have Frank Thomas in this role than the new hitting coach... Singleton was even worse than DJ, and yet he later got a job with ESPN/MLB Tonight. Still miss the likes of Rooney, Hagin and Dave Wills.

http://www.google.com.hk/#hl=zh-CN&new...249&bih=473 Larry Dierker 435-348 (.556) 5 years of out 6 finishing in first place, one fourth place finish That would have been the best argument for hiring Don Cooper as the manager. Jerry Coleman was a complete disaster with the 1980 Padres and is always going to be known more as a broadcaster. And, of course, those Astros teams that Dierker managed had a ton of talent (funny how that usually has more to do with a manager's success---see the Trey Hillman disaster in KC, and reading back on how positive/optimistic Joe Posnanski was when the hire was announced, interesting to say the least). KW has left Robin's cabinet, being optimistic, at best...a glass half full. So, to summarize, Hodges, Stanky, Larry Dierker, Torre (eventually), Connie Mack and Bob Brenly all succeeded with zero prior managerial experience.

A.J. Hinch similarly launched himself from the high dive when he was named to manage the Diamondbacks, and the move quickly cost Josh Byrnes his job as general manager. Hinch, like Ventura, was an intelligent former player with no managerial experience. There have been a lot of different paths taken to the manager's office, and managerial experience hasn't always proven necessary. Gil Hodges went directly from playing to managing, and he was one of the best managers in the last 50 years (to the chagrin of the 1969 Cubs). Eddie Stanky left the Giants after 1952 to be a player-manager for the Cardinals and went 88-66 in the first of his three-plus seasons. (He later managed the Sox for two-plus seasons, finishing above .500 in 1966-67.) Jerry Coleman and Larry Dierker prepped for their managerial careers as broadcasters. Trey Hillman had managed in Japan, but before taking over the Royals was last in a big-league clubhouse when he was a locker-room attendant. Bob Brenly had coached but never managed at any level before getting a chance, and his Diamondbacks won a World Series. If there ever has been a hire as out of left field as Ventura, it was a desperation move by the old Washington Senators. Ted Williams had been out of baseball eight seasons, doing little more than fishing and serving as a part-time instructor for Carl Yastrzemski and lesser Red Sox players, when the Senators hired him to manage. Four years later, he was the owner of a 273-364 record and never again wanted to try that trick. From Phil Rogers' article....no mention of Connie Mack, Torre or Ted Turner

LaRussa had a JD degree from FSU and just a little more than one season as a minor league manager with the Sox...overall, just 1 2/3rd's seasons of experience coaching, after his minor league playing days. Ventura had this recent 1/2 season as the "roving instructor" and clearly wanted a bigger role. The White Sox gave La Russa his first managerial opportunity in 1978 by naming him skipper of their Double-A affiliate, the Knoxville Sox of the Southern League. La Russa spent only a half-season at Knoxville before being promoted to the White Sox coaching staff when owner Bill Veeck changed managers from Bob Lemon to Larry Doby. But Doby struggled in the managerial role and was fired at the end of the season; Don Kessinger, former star shortstop of the crosstown Cubs, was named the White Sox' player-manager for 1979, and La Russa was demoted to manager of the Triple-A Iowa Oaks of the American Association. But Kessinger was not the answer, either. The ChiSox were only 46–60 when he was fired and La Russa was summoned from Iowa, two-thirds of the way through the 1979 season. The White Sox played .500 baseball for the rest of the '79 campaign, and La Russa's career was launched. He credits Paul Richards with first inspiring him to believe he could succeed as a major league manager.

QUOTE (fathom @ Oct 6, 2011 -> 08:14 PM) What's this in reference to? Maybe his quote about being "President" of the organization in the Doug Padilla article just posted?

QUOTE (fathom @ Oct 6, 2011 -> 08:12 PM) No one has answered the most important question: do Ventura's kids have twitter accounts? Question #2, which direction will Cowley take off in with Ventura? Or will he just mysteriously slink out of town like Mariotti...

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Oct 6, 2011 -> 08:11 PM) Oh, condescension. That's new. So if it's so easy, and you're the one making claims that this happens all the time, why don't you Google these managers with absolutely no experience for us? Please, and try to make them in the recent history of baseball. You came up with Joe Torre (35 years ago) and Connie Mack (117 years ago) so far. Let's hear the rest. Ted Turner, lol. Would have been on board with Omar Vizquel as the next manager (my "out of left field" pick) but it seems he's going with Guillen to Florida.

One can only guess that KW had very little to do with this. The majority of our anger should be directed at Reinsdorf...if one is inclined to react immediately in that direction. Obviously JR is the one who convinced Robin to do this...conversations had been going back and forth for a number of years about him taking a more active role in the organization. Obviously, most believed he'd have to "put in his time" before he would become manager. But clearly he works well enough with Bell and KW, as well. Heck, it's not like you've ever heard of anyone not getting along with the guy, he's not a polarizing personality like Fisk or Black Jack.