2 minutes ago, Yearnin' for Yermin said:

What about Dallas? He was a leader on the team and complicit with it. Did you not want him on the White Sox?

I couldn't care less really what they do as long as they're consistent. 

Either you let Rose, Bonds, Jackson et al. in the HOF or you permawhack guys, including everyone involved with the 2017-18 Astros at the MLB level,  make the owner of the Astros sell the team, etc. There is no middleground. You can't take the moral high ground on Rose/Bonds and then not treat the Astros accordingly. 

No thank you. 

Don't care one bit.  It's just baseball.  Much more serious things in life to worry about.

4 hours ago, KrankinSox said:

I want everyone who is voting "absolute deal breaker. will not follow the team if he is hired" to name themselves in this thread and actually leave the board when he's hired in a couple of weeks. Thanks.

Let the record show that these posters do not support a Hinch hire.

Baron, Harold’s Leg Lift, 35thstreetswarm, YourWhatHurts, JoshPR, black jack, Green Line, Jack Parkman, Blackout Friday.

1 hour ago, Jack Parkman said:

Shady Brady and Bill Belicheat

I despise both Brady and Belichick.....and I don't think they're legit. In fact both should have been banned from the sport long ago. 

The "took a OTC supplement and didn't do my homework" excuse for testing positive for roids is more believable than any excuse Hinch and Cora have. 

 

This is a huge scandal. Its Black Sox level shit. 

If they're not going to lay down the hammer on these groups, then let Pete Rose, Bonds et al in the HOF, posthumously elect 1919 White Sox to the HOF and allow gambling, because they're lying about caring about the integrity of the game. 

I'm ok giving people a second chance, but if baseball has the audacity to keep players like Pete Rose and Barry Bonds out of the HOF, and don't permawhack these guys AND the players involved, then they need to drop the facade and quit pretending they actually care about the integrity of the game. 

Either you care about the integrity of the game or you don't. 

 

What does keeping someone out of the Hall of the Fame for roiding have to do with giving a manager a second chance for cheating?  Even a steroid user gets two chances before they get a lifetime ban.  I think Hinch should come under similar scrutiny if he ever is in consideration for a Hall of Fame spot (ethics / morals matter in that context), but in the interim he served his time and should be able to manage again.

2 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

What does keeping someone out of the Hall of the Fame for roiding have to do with giving a manager a second chance for cheating?  Even a steroid user gets two chances before they get a lifetime ban.  I think Hinch should come under similar scrutiny if he ever is in consideration for a Hall of Fame spot (ethics / morals matter in that context), but in the interim he served his time and should be able to manage again.

The Astros literally hacked the game with computers. They used AI in order to decode signs and had an intricate relaying system to the dugout that involved banging a trashcan a certain number of times in order to gain a competitive advantage. This was way worse than what Coppoella did with the Braves, and he got a lifetime ban. They needed to bring the hammer down on the Astros to make sure it never happens again. What's to stop other teams from doing it and trying harder to conceal it? 

1 minute ago, Jack Parkman said:

The Astros literally hacked the game with computers. They used AI in order to decode signs and had an intricate relaying system to the dugout that involved banging a trashcan a certain number of times in order to gain a competitive advantage. This was way worse than what Coppoella did with the Braves, and he got a lifetime ban. They needed to bring the hammer down on the Astros to make sure it never happens again. What's to stop other teams from doing it and trying harder to conceal it? 

That’s all fair, but I still don’t see what it has to do with Hall of Fame qualifications.

4 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

That’s all fair, but I still don’t see what it has to do with Hall of Fame qualifications.

Pete Rose and Barry Bonds et al. are being excluded because they violated the integrity of the game. How is this any different? 

If you want to say it's a HOF issue only...that's fine, but I expect consistency across baseball when it comes to integrity of the sport issues. 

Either you want to protect the integrity of the game or you don't. Just don't lie to the fans about it. 

Pete Rose is banned from baseball. How is cheating any different from gambling? It's 6 of one, half dozen of the other. 

Edited October 13, 20205 yr by Jack Parkman

6 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

Pete Rose and Barry Bonds et al. are being excluded because they violated the integrity of the game. How is this any different? 

If you want to say it's a HOF issue only...that's fine, but I expect consistency across baseball when it comes to integrity of the sport issues. 

Either you want to protect the integrity of the game or you don't. Just don't lie to the fans about it. 

Pete Rose is banned from baseball. How is cheating any different from gambling? It's 6 of one, half dozen of the other. 

There is a really long history about gambling in baseball.  Like this has been the penalty for a full century now. And there will always be that distinction.  Plus cheating ton win will never be equal with bringing the integrity of the game into question. 

There's a stark difference between an, "Oops, I cheated that one time, I'm sorry" and "my team spent multiple years building an intricate system involving computers, cameras and monitors to steal signs which I tried to cover up and lied about all while throwing multiple people under the bus." 

Edited October 13, 20205 yr by TaylorStSox

17 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

The Astros literally hacked the game with computers. They used AI in order to decode signs and had an intricate relaying system to the dugout that involved banging a trashcan a certain number of times in order to gain a competitive advantage. This was way worse than what Coppoella did with the Braves, and he got a lifetime ban. They needed to bring the hammer down on the Astros to make sure it never happens again. What's to stop other teams from doing it and trying harder to conceal it? 

So should the white Sox be responsible to enforce a stricter punishment than MLB decided on?

9 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

Pete Rose and Barry Bonds et al. are being excluded because they violated the integrity of the game. How is this any different? 

If you want to say it's a HOF issue only...that's fine, but I expect consistency across baseball when it comes to integrity of the sport issues. 

Either you want to protect the integrity of the game or you don't. Just don't lie to the fans about it. 

Pete Rose is banned from baseball. How is cheating any different from gambling? It's 6 of one, half dozen of the other. 

Again, being immortalized in the HoF has a different set of criteria than being allowed to be an active member of the league.  You don’t receive a lifetime ban for getting caught using steroids, but you probably shouldn’t be allowed in the HoF.  I think the same applies to Hinch.  If he gets caught cheating again then he should he outright banned, but until then give him a second chance.  But even if he won the next five World Series I don’t think he deserves to be in the Hall as integrity does matter there. 

19 minutes ago, bmags said:

So should the white Sox be responsible to enforce a stricter punishment than MLB decided on?

I think this is the best point that can be made. 

There are some actions in life for which I wholeheartedly believe there can be no mercy nor second chances. Actions for which the excuse “he served his time” matters not. Banging on a trash can for a slight advantage in a game, where the prime victims are your own fans who now have their championship memories besmirched, is NOT in that category.

I have always considered myself a diehard Sox fan. I guess I lag behind some people here. If Hinch is the most likely to manage us well during our now open contention window, hire him. I want to watch enjoyable, competitive baseball games. I want to go to the playoffs. I want to win championships. I will teach my children how to be moral and decent humans, but AJ Hinch’s employment status will have nothing to do with that.

1 hour ago, The Beast said:

Let the record show that these posters do not support a Hinch hire.

Baron, Harold’s Leg Lift, 35thstreetswarm, YourWhatHurts, JoshPR, black jack, Green Line, Jack Parkman, Blackout Friday.

...and about 60 others apparently.  What exactly are you hoping to accomplish with this? 

Are A.J. Hinch and Alex Cora, renowned cheaters at this point, the best options this up and coming White Sox team have as their next potential manager?  
 

There is no one better who doesn’t come with all of the cheater baggage?

4 minutes ago, Thad Bosley said:

Are A.J. Hinch and Alex Cora, renowned cheaters at this point, the best options this up and coming White Sox team have as their next potential manager?  
 

There is no one better who doesn’t come with all of the cheater baggage?

They are objectively the best managers available when you take into consideration the criteria the Hahn said he is looking for.

4 minutes ago, Orlando said:

They are objectively the best managers available when you take into consideration the criteria the Hahn said he is looking for.

Does Hahn’s criteria take into account the cheating both would-be candidates were guilty of leading to their current suspensions?

I hate the Astros with the passion after the cheating scandal but I'd welcome AJ Hinch if he's the best candidate for the job.

I simply don't see the White Sox making this move considering all the noise it will bring with. I voted option 2.

It definitely matters to me. Bring in somebody who will not make the Sox the enemy of all other teams immediately. There are other managers out there.

2 hours ago, The Beast said:

Let the record show that these posters do not support a Hinch hire.

Baron, Harold’s Leg Lift, 35thstreetswarm, YourWhatHurts, JoshPR, black jack, Green Line, Jack Parkman, Blackout Friday.

Add me to the list.

38 minutes ago, Thad Bosley said:

Does Hahn’s criteria take into account the cheating both would-be candidates were guilty of leading to their current suspensions?

Who else fits his description? Ned Yost and Bruce Bochy? Obviously not Yost, and I doubt it with Bochy. He was clearly alluding to Hinch and Cora. 

4 hours ago, Dallas Kong said:

I think this is the best point that can be made. 

There are some actions in life for which I wholeheartedly believe there can be no mercy nor second chances. Actions for which the excuse “he served his time” matters not. Banging on a trash can for a slight advantage in a game, where the prime victims are your own fans who now have their championship memories besmirched, is NOT in that category.

I have always considered myself a diehard Sox fan. I guess I lag behind some people here. If Hinch is the most likely to manage us well during our now open contention window, hire him. I want to watch enjoyable, competitive baseball games. I want to go to the playoffs. I want to win championships. I will teach my children how to be moral and decent humans, but AJ Hinch’s employment status will have nothing to do with that.

Not hiring him isn't a punishment.  He isn't being opressed.  GMAFB

I want to make this simplistic.

Aj Hinch is an intelligent baseball guy (Not mocking Hahn , promise)

White Sox have positive media attention at the moment.

Were the ‘Good guys’. We don’t need a manager that will be targeted.

We have a potiental dynasty. I would hate to see it tainted by bringing it a controversial leader.

This is a job that people want. 

Outside of baseball. Just basic business sense... If I have an opening for a leadership position and right out of the gate I have a target, I set myself up for failure.

If ‘Person A’ is my target. Regardless on how Person A interviews; I will ultimately have a pro-bias based on that person being my target canidate.

A leadership position is everything. For my business I want a performer that wants the job and bleeds pride and commitment over the person with prior success who thinks he deserves it.

If Aj Hinch is the guy at the end; its not because he was targeted by this organization. It will be strictly based on his interveiw and potiental working relationship with the front office. It will happen naturally.

This front office is way to deligent ‘target’ Aj Hinch.  I think our next manager isn’t going to be somebody we aren’t speculating on.

1 hour ago, Ben Waffleson said:

I want to make this simplistic.

Aj Hinch is an intelligent baseball guy (Not mocking Hahn , promise)

White Sox have positive media attention at the moment.

Were the ‘Good guys’. We don’t need a manager that will be targeted.

We have a potiental dynasty. I would hate to see it tainted by bringing it a controversial leader.

This is a job that people want. 

Outside of baseball. Just basic business sense... If I have an opening for a leadership position and right out of the gate I have a target, I set myself up for failure.

If ‘Person A’ is my target. Regardless on how Person A interviews; I will ultimately have a pro-bias based on that person being my target canidate.

A leadership position is everything. For my business I want a performer that wants the job and bleeds pride and commitment over the person with prior success who thinks he deserves it.

If Aj Hinch is the guy at the end; its not because he was targeted by this organization. It will be strictly based on his interveiw and potiental working relationship with the front office. It will happen naturally.

This front office is way to deligent ‘target’ Aj Hinch.  I think our next manager isn’t going to be somebody we aren’t speculating on.

I would say that prioritizing interview performance over known previous performance in a similar job is also bias and also a dangerous one.

2 hours ago, SleepyWhiteSox said:

Not hiring him isn't a punishment.  He isn't being opressed.  GMAFB

Where did I suggest that?

He was supposed to be out of baseball for a year. He was out of baseball for a year.

The offense wasn’t premeditated murder so let’s call it water under the bridge and moooove on.