Stoney has been pretty open in his backhanded criticism towards Ricky Renteria. See below for tweets.

 

 

 

Stone's also thrown shade at Ricky during broadcasts. He also responded to a fans tweet and bashed Mazara recently. I can't seem to find that tweet unfortunately. Criticism of the team is what did him in with the Cubs. Stone is the best of the best in terms of broadcasting. Do you see this one ending poorly like it did with the Cubs? I can't imagine it ending well if he keeps bashing Ricky. Hopefully it means the writing is on the wall for Ricky.

Edited September 14, 20205 yr by Yearnin' for Yermin

5 minutes ago, Yearnin' for Yermin said:

Stoney has been pretty open in his backhanded criticism towards Ricky Renteria. See below for tweets.

 

 

Stos also thrown shade at Ricky during broadcasts. He also responded to a fans tweet and bashed Mazara recently. I can't seem to find that tweet unfortunately. Criticism of the team is what did him in with the Cubs. Stone is the best of the best in terms of broadcasting. Do you see this one ending poorly like it did with the Cubs? I can't imagine it ending well if he keeps bashing Ricky. Hopefully it means the writing is on the wall for Ricky.

I doubt they'd be so petty to fire Steve Stone over RR complaints on Twitter. But you are probably right about him thinking Ricky is not a good manager. He's definitely sarcastic in both those tweets mentioned above. Interesting he'd go there. Obviously he's playing with house's money at his age. Obviously he'd be fine if he got canned.

 

2 minutes ago, oneofthemikes said:

 

Thanks, will add to the first post

I think it is OK that a broadcaster criticizes the team or manager but doing it while you are having a really good season might not be the smartest idea.

Love Stone throwing shade at RR's poor decision making.  Just wish the critiques would filter down.  Especially re McCann vs Berrios...

24 minutes ago, Dominikk85 said:

I think it is OK that a broadcaster criticizes the team or manager but doing it while you are having a really good season might not be the smartest idea.

Given how JR operates I'd have a hard time believing he's doing this without the FO's approval.  Renteria has been saying the right things about analytics lately but I'm getting the feeling that the FO is sending some smoke signals bout a possible change.  Renteria has stopped bunting entirely, and you know almost for certain that decision didn't come from him, but from Hahn.  Things may be heading towards a "mutual parting".  Obviously a deep post season run would complicate things.

I think Renteria is a horrible no good game day manager but I can't deny that for the most part he's had the guys ready to play this year.  He's not the worst manager and if he continues to evolve maybe he sticks around.  There will be a VERY interesting meeting with him and Hahn and Jerry and Kenny after the season I'd imagine.

All that said, I can kinda imagine Hahn absolutely fuming when he sees Eloy in LF in a 4 run game in the 9th like last night.  Like dude, you HAVE the roster now, fucking use it wisely.

Edited September 14, 20205 yr by chitownsportsfan

I wouldn’t mind seeing Ricky get replaced since he is terrible at ingame strategy decisions. To his credit though, the players love him and always play hard for him, there is no clubhouse drama and he seems to be a good guy in general.

59 minutes ago, greg775 said:

I doubt they'd be so petty to fire Steve Stone over RR complaints on Twitter. But you are probably right about him thinking Ricky is not a good manager. He's definitely sarcastic in both those tweets mentioned above. Interesting he'd go there. Obviously he's playing with house's money at his age. Obviously he'd be fine if he got canned.

The comment towards Mazara was someone said Mazara is due tonight, and Stone replied that he's been due for weeks now. I can't find the actual tweet, but that's pretty much what was said.

The fact that renterias best quality as a manager seems to be that “hes a good guy” speaks volumes about just how terrible a manager he is

Add him ripping Renteria for not putting Dyson out there in the 9th tonight to the list.

Stone is 100% correct here.  Renteria has been given a massive gift in this talented team.  They win in spite of his bone headed lineups and bullpen choices.

With that said, there is no way in hell the White Sox, of all teams, are going to fire their manager after a hugely successful season.  The chances of Ricky winning the megamillions is higher than the chance that Jerry fires him.  Stone had best hold his fire until next season.

Now I must say... I have just become a big Stone fan.

6 hours ago, Yearnin' for Yermin said:

Thanks, will add to the first post

Well, the fact Stone didn't back Ricky there when given a chance means he thinks RR is a bozo. Interesting. I love Stoney though. But I think RR deserves some credit.

I think he's throwing more than shade with those comments. 

1 hour ago, SoxAce said:

Add him ripping Renteria for not putting Dyson out there in the 9th tonight to the list.

I’m not a RR fan, but I actually think it was the right decision to leave Eloy in the game there. It’s more likely that the Twins score a couple runs without the defense of the left fielder being a factor than it is for a ball to be hit to left field that Dyson would catch and Eloy wouldn’t, where that ball actually causes the Twins to tie it or take the lead. 

It reminds me of when Konerko used to get pinch run for in the bottom of the 9th when he would be on first base with two outs in a tie game. Sure, it improves your chances to win that half inning, but I don’t believe it improves your chances to win the game overall. So many times, Konerko’s spot would come up in extras and he was already out of the game. And in those 9th innings, what were the chances that the next guy up would happen to hit a ball in the gap where Konerko wouldn’t score but the pinch runner would?

12 minutes ago, SoxBlanco said:

I’m not a RR fan, but I actually think it was the right decision to leave Eloy in the game there. It’s more likely that the Twins score a couple runs without the defense of the left fielder being a factor than it is for a ball to be hit to left field that Dyson would catch and Eloy wouldn’t, where that ball actually causes the Twins to tie it or take the lead. 

It reminds me of when Konerko used to get pinch run for in the bottom of the 9th when he would be on first base with two outs in a tie game. Sure, it improves your chances to win that half inning, but I don’t believe it improves your chances to win the game overall. So many times, Konerko’s spot would come up in extras and he was already out of the game. And in those 9th innings, what were the chances that the next guy up would happen to hit a ball in the gap where Konerko wouldn’t score but the pinch runner would?

You go for the win up two or more in the 9th. If it goes to extras it would have been a fail on your team anyway. We have enough offense to get around Eloy's missing bat, especially with the extra innings rules. 

Just now, SonofaRoache said:

You go for the win up two or more in the 9th. If it goes to extras it would have been a fail on your team anyway. We have enough offense to get around Eloy's missing bat, especially with the extra innings rules. 

And we would likely have enough pitching/defense to overcome the 1% chance that there happens to be a ball hit to left field that Eloy can’t catch but Dyson would have. Mathematically, I think the chances of the Twins scoring 2 runs is much more likely than one of those specific balls being hit to left field and it costs us the game. 

Hindsight is 20/20. I agree with RR and SoxBlanco.

 

7 hours ago, SoxBlanco said:

And we would likely have enough pitching/defense to overcome the 1% chance that there happens to be a ball hit to left field that Eloy can’t catch but Dyson would have. Mathematically, I think the chances of the Twins scoring 2 runs is much more likely than one of those specific balls being hit to left field and it costs us the game. 

 The only thing that matters is preventing the twins from scoring twice.  Having the worst LF in MLB in over one of the best increases those odds.  This is pretty simple stuff.

Just now, chitownsportsfan said:

 The only thing that matters is preventing the twins from scoring twice.  Having the worst LF in MLB in over one of the best increases those odds.  This is pretty simple stuff.

This is absolutely wrong. I'm willing to hear both sides of the argument because I think it's a great discussion, but to say the only thing matters is preventing the Twins from scoring is just wrong. Making decisions for what is best in the moment without looking ahead to how it could affect the rest of the game is a horrible way to make decisions. 

Let me ask you this:  In your estimation, how many balls have been hit to left field this entire year that Eloy didn't catch, but Dyson would have caught if he was in there?

7 hours ago, SoxBlanco said:

And we would likely have enough pitching/defense to overcome the 1% chance that there happens to be a ball hit to left field that Eloy can’t catch but Dyson would have. Mathematically, I think the chances of the Twins scoring 2 runs is much more likely than one of those specific balls being hit to left field and it costs us the game. 

That's what the Boston Manager said when he left Buckner in at first base in World Series vs Mets.

That's what Cubs Manager said when he left Durham in at first base.

"I don't need a defensive replacement, because they'll never hit the ball to my slug.  What are the odds?"

 

1 minute ago, SoxBlanco said:

This is absolutely wrong. I'm willing to hear both sides of the argument because I think it's a great discussion, but to say the only thing matters is preventing the Twins from scoring is just wrong. Making decisions for what is best in the moment without looking ahead to how it could affect the rest of the game is a horrible way to make decisions. 

Let me ask you this:  In your estimation, how many balls have been hit to left field this entire year that Eloy didn't catch, but Dyson would have caught if he was in there?

Makes no difference.  All it takes is one.

1 minute ago, oldsox said:

Makes no difference.  All it takes is one.

This is such a horrible way of looking at it. You obviously refuse to look at the math and probabilities that come into play, so it's not even worth my time to discuss it with you.

9 minutes ago, oldsox said:

That's what the Boston Manager said when he left Buckner in at first base in World Series vs Mets.

That's what Cubs Manager said when he left Durham in at first base.

"I don't need a defensive replacement, because they'll never hit the ball to my slug.  What are the odds?"

 

Comparing infielders to outfielders is ridiculous in this situation. I would 100% agree with putting in a defensive replacement for an infielder in that situation. But even the worst outfielders in the league catch almost all of the same balls that the best outfielder in the league would catch.