Fire.

 

Which means NOTHING, no matter how much the moron fan majority says it does. Torre had enough fire in the late 90's apparently.

the NY newspapers say Steinbrenner is going to take another day to decide. The NY Post, however, says that Torre's going nowhere. but like I said, this happens every year. Yankees lose, Steinbrenner blows a gasket, papers say Torre's going to go. wasn't Piniella supposed to replace Torre last year?

the NY newspapers say Steinbrenner is going to take another day to decide. The NY Post, however, says that Torre's going nowhere. but like I said, this happens every year. Yankees lose, Steinbrenner blows a gasket, papers say Torre's going to go. wasn't Piniella supposed to replace Torre last year?

 

It was never believable until this year though.

 

Title changed for now.

It was never believable until this year though.

 

Title changed for now.

why is it any more believable this year? so Torre only has one year left on his contract? last year it was two, and everyone was saying Steinbrenner can afford to pay two managers for a couple of years. the only difference with Steinbrenner now and Steinbrenner then is that in the 70's and 80's, he really did fire his managers. now he merely threatens it.

 

maybe Torre will get canned, but I doubt it, given the history. but it'd be unfair to fire him without giving him a chance with a bullpen.

Edited October 10, 200619 yr by AirScott

why is it any more believable this year? so Torre only has one year left on his contract? last year it was two, and everyone was saying Steinbrenner can afford to pay two managers for a couple of years. the only difference with Steinbrenner now and Steinbrenner then is that in the 70's and 80's, he really did fire his managers. now he merely threatens it.

 

maybe Torre will get canned, but I doubt it, given the history. but it'd be unfair to fire him without giving him a chance with a bullpen.

 

Personally, I never believed it in previous years, so much so that I don't even remember this happening in previous years. However, this year, the the thought entered my mind before the series was over. It made it more difficult to believe it wasn't for real this time.

It's the same anywhere... If a CEO takes a company into record profits for 4 of his first 5 years and then does nothing the following 6 years...he's out.

 

I don't feel badly for Joe at all. He'll get another chance somewhere else, and to be quite frank, THEN we'll see if Torre is a HOF coach or not.

Torre holding a press conference for some reason, I heard on the radio. If I were him, I'd just quit and answer all the questions himself. He doesn't need this anymore. Take a year or so off and come back to another organization when he is ready.

Give George a big F U.

why is it any more believable this year? so Torre only has one year left on his contract? last year it was two, and everyone was saying Steinbrenner can afford to pay two managers for a couple of years. the only difference with Steinbrenner now and Steinbrenner then is that in the 70's and 80's, he really did fire his managers. now he merely threatens it.

Aside from saving a little money, the one thing that may be different now is that Pinella is 100% available. Last year he had just been fired, there was a bit of a contract mess with Tampa IIRC, and it seemed like he didn't want to manage this year. Next year, Pinella is going to be managing somewhere, so if that's the guy George wants, this is probably his only year to get him.

why is it any more believable this year?

 

Not many teams lose in 4 in the playoffs with a team OBP of .363, which has to be one of the highest, if not THE highest, team OBP of all time.

 

For simple comparison's sake, the White Sox's offense, which was the best in the majors in the first half, had 5 players - 2 of whom were bench players - with an OBP over .363.

oh thank god i was so nervous about his future...barf

I always liked Joe Torre as a manager. I'm glad his job is safe. Steinbrenner must like Torre any other manager would have been long gone.

Edited October 10, 200619 yr by whitesox1976

This definately wasn't the best Yankees team around, the pitching was adaquate at best. I like Torre so I'm happy he's staying.

I'd rather hear about how the Mets will pitch to Pujols or how the Tigers will hit Zito.

Not many teams lose in 4 in the playoffs with a team OBP of .363, which has to be one of the highest, if not THE highest, team OBP of all time.

 

For simple comparison's sake, the White Sox's offense, which was the best in the majors in the first half, had 5 players - 2 of whom were bench players - with an OBP over .363.

not many teams win in the playoffs with a 4.18 bullpen ERA either.

 

the 2005 World Series Champion White Sox certainly didn't have a team OBP of .363 (it was .322, good for 24th in the majors). we did, however, have a 3.23 bullpen ERA.

not many teams win in the playoffs with a 4.18 bullpen ERA either.

 

Florida Marlins, 2003 - 4.29

New York Yankees, 2000 - 4.52

 

The DBacks(3.84) and Red Sox(3.87) weren't much better.

 

However, not many teams win with a team ERA of 4.41. The playoffs are all about starting pitching and having about 3-4 relievers you can count upon. The regular season is largely dependent upon having a good bullpen and having respectable starters.

 

There's a pretty good reason as to why Oakland and Detroit are in the ALCS right now instead of Minnesota and New York, and it's all about starting pitching.

 

You think the Sox would have won it last year without good starting pitching?

Florida Marlins, 2003 - 4.29

New York Yankees, 2000 - 4.52

 

The DBacks(3.84) and Red Sox(3.87) weren't much better.

 

However, not many teams win with a team ERA of 4.41. The playoffs are all about starting pitching and having about 3-4 relievers you can count upon. The regular season is largely dependent upon having a good bullpen and having respectable starters.

 

There's a pretty good reason as to why Oakland and Detroit are in the ALCS right now instead of Minnesota and New York, and it's all about starting pitching.

 

You think the Sox would have won it last year without good starting pitching?

I didn't feel like getting into starters' ERAs as well. going into the playoffs, the Yankees had two quality starters with mid-3's ERAs (Mussina and Wang), and Wang won their only game. Johnson's over-the-hill and injured, so there was no telling what to expect with him. the worst relievers for the Yankees this series were their 4 and 5 starters. all that matters is Torre had no reliable pitcher not named Mariano Rivera, and that sunk the Yankees. it's hard to compete when your pitchers (starters or relievers) can't hold a so-so offense to under 6 runs.

 

and don't ask me if the Sox would have won it last year without our starters...obviously throwing 5 consecutive complete games says it all...I need to buy the box-set, to need to relive Cotts being our workhorse out of the bullpen between ALCS Game 1 and WS Game 2, when he had been the only reliever used and threw 2/3 of an inning in Game 1 of the ALCS.