example1

Perhaps when I said that with another WS Tito would be in the same stratta ("up there") with LaRussa rubbed a number of LaRussa lovers the wrong way. Combined with a deep disdain for Francona (which I also don't understand) it started what Dipre appropriately called a "shitstorm". My point was merely that with a 3rd WS title Francona would have to be considered one of the better managers in the past few decades, where LaRussa clearly sits. Perhaps I should have named another manager, but that person likely would have started a shitstorm as well. I think Scioscia is a great manager too. He has also had a bunch of very good teams. Any arguements there?

No team is ever guaranteed a world series. He won two of them. He has managed to get into the playoffs in 04, 05, 07, 08 and (hopefully) 09. I don't know what more people could expect of him. I've watched a lot of baseball over the years (as has everyone else, I'm sure), and I see very little reason for criticism. He doesn't do anything by rote habit, he always has a reason for his decisions and they have generally worked out really well for the team. How anyone can dispute that is beyond me. Good managers stay with teams. Will Francona be punished if he stays with the Sox for 20 years like Bobby Cox has? I hope not. He also started Derek Lowe in all 3 series clinching games that year despite his absolutely horrible season. Mistakes and successes happen all the time, either by choice or blind luck. Fair enough.

I think the discussion you and I were having was actually whether or not Tito would, with another WS win, be considered to be a manager in the same stratta as LaRussa. I never said he was better. Perhaps someone else did. :dunno: LaRussa finished an average of FOURTH in the division with Chicago. His win % was .506 and he didn't make the playoffs once. In Oakland he had a number of winning years, and finished below .500 for his last 3 years. Again, I am not s***ing on LaRussa. He's a good manager. I was paying Tito a compliment rather than ripping on LaRussa. Just as people want to take away credit from Tito for winning with a good team, I think LaRussa has only won with good teams too. In 2006 he won with St. Louis and they were not the best team on the field. However, he won because the Tigers threw the Series away and the NL was weak overall. His team that year was 83-78. They had a .516 Win %. .516. That's not him turning water to wine, that's winning a s***** division to get to the craps table. They beat the Mets in the playoffs to get to the WS, facing a Mets staff of Glavine, Traschel, Perez and Maine. C'mon, let's get serious here. LaRussa has won when his teams are great. He has not won when his teams suck. He won in 2006 with a s***** team against a team that gave them the Series and a bunch of hack opponents in the NL. I think he does make good decisions on the field, but like every other manager he is only as successful as his players are. Tito and LaRussa both handle their players well.

I wasn't wasting your time. I was asking for you to back up what you say. That's not being a douche. If you were busy in the midst of some other discussion then I apologize. However, I noticed you spent a lot of time talking about YOTNs date. Apparently looking up baseball related stuff is wasting your time. 2006 to be specific. Post-season= Crapshoot. So how does LaRussa get credit for winning the WS in 2006? I remember that series was literally thrown away by a clearly superior Tigers team. LaRussa had nothing to do with having the Tigers pitchers throw the ball all over the field. Their winning % are similar to one another and they have had virtually the same average division finish. LaRussa is better in both areas, but not by a whole lot. Remember, I said that Francona would be up there with LaRussa. Not that LaRussa sucks. I have a problem with people who make one word points and then act offended when asked to back them up. I wasn't being a douche, I was engaging in a discussion that you chose to enter and then quickly wanted to leave. Not my bad. You didn't think it warranted an explanation to begin with. Name calling? Really? I take offense to the way that you have responded to this discussion. I didn't call you names. I merely stated that you tend to have short answers and then expect that people who you disagree with will understand why immediately without explanation. Welcome back to the site.

Right. You will bait others but then you act shocked if you percieve it coming your way... I did no baiting. Thanks for the Baseball Reference page links. I have them both up on my computer already, but I appreciate you finding the link for me. The numbers you look at are the same ones I see and think Francona has a case. As many WS titles. Tougher division. Tougher city. Tougher egos. I think LaRussa is overrated and Francona gets overlooked. You think strategically he's been a horrible manager, so you must think this team has drastically underachieved during his tenure. I don't think so. I think 2 WS, 3 League Championship Series, and 4 playoff appearences in 5 years is about right for this team.

Sorry. Perhaps you should go back to discussing YOTN's date tonight. Sorry to waste your time by asking you to back up your opinion. The A's weren't a powerhouse team? The Cards with Edmonds, Pujols, Rolen, Walker, etc., weren't a powerhouse team? All the best managers manage power house teams. That's why we discuss them. They've won the same number of WS in much less time. He won 3 straight AL Pennants in 88, 89 and 90, but lost in the WS twice. LaRussa has won his division 12 times and won 2 WS and 5 pennants. If you can't take someone coming back at you then don't post the half-hearted comments without anything to back yourself up. YOTN was agreeing with you. You commented first (sort of, with "lol, no") so I responded to you... Never have before. YOTN and I have no beef.

BTW, if they win the WS this year he would have won 3 WS in 10 years as a manager. That would tie him for 4th all time. Top managers (WS Won//Years managed): Stengel: 7 WS (25 years) McCarthy: 7 WS (24 years) Mack: 5 WS (53 years) Torre: 4 WS (28 years) Alston: 4 WS (23 years) Anderson: 3 WS (26 years) Huggins: 3 WS (17 years) McGraw: 3 WS (33 years) LaRussa: 2 WS (31 years) Every manager who has won 3 WS or more is in the HOF except for Joe Torre (it's just a matter of time). I'm open to argument. I don't know if Francona is the best game manager in baseball. I do know that he has managed a VERY difficult baseball environment during a very difficult era without EVER coming under enough criticism for people to call for his job. He has had a very good team, but also lots of big egos to manage.

This is kind of what I'm coming to expect from you, unfortunately. I make a claim, I'm a reasonable poster, go ahead and explain my view away. Instead you believe it is so patently false that it doesn't warrant an explanation.

Lol why not?

It depends on Beckett. The Sox will likely offer him what they think he is worth and Beckett can either take it or not. I imagine he will get some very lucrative offers and I would guess he has some interest in returning to pitch in Texas at some point (Rangers or Astros). Beckett is hard to figure out. He's one of the best pitchers in the game, one of the best big game pitchers in history, but his stuff is pretty two dimensional and he has occasional periods of being very hittable. HWSNBN is a better overall pitcher and you be very young. He could certainly anchor the staff with Lester and Buchholz if Beckett decided he wanted the biggest payday possible. Of course, the Sox may decide that they simply can't let Beckett go and be dominant for another team. He's proven to be durable and he pitches very well in Boston. The FO may determine that his value to them is too high to not offer him an enormous contract. Frankly, I would have no problem with he and HWSNBN getting deals approaching $20m. Poor Jon Lester and his reasonable contract though...

I would rather they not move him for "he who shall not be named" (HWSNBN). I only brought up that possibility because people were saying he is untradeable. I would much rather they empty the farm or move another player as that marquee piece. I'm still convinced that if all is going well, Dice-K is one of the better pitchers in the league. Beckett, Lester, "HWSNBN", Dice-K, Buchholz Yum.

He would be up there with the best managers in recent decades. Don't know how he compares with Connie Mack or John McGraw, or whether that kind of thing matters. He would certainly be seen as better than Lou Pinella, and probably right there with LaRussa. Francona has a very calming influence on a stressful locker room. Remember, he was hand picked by Theo and Co., and that was obviously a very good and durable choice.

I don't see the Giants dealing Cain. If the Giants want to be competetive they won't trade Cain for Fielder. They're about as valuable as one another and they will still need pitching if they hope to win. Perhaps Sanchez, but not Cain. Kelly anderson Bowden + is way too much for Fielder and Hardy. Hardy simply isn't that good. His power is nice but his low-OBP and inconsistency is concerning. The Red Sox are not enticed by middle-of-the-road semi-stars from other teams. I just don't see them doing much to get Hardy. His power needs to be weighed against his inability to get on base more than Jason Varitek.

Who said your English had to be perfect? The comma is not necessary, whether in "perfect" English or in "regular" English. No graduate school professor in the country would have taken points off for that. In fact, in my experience it would have been praised for brevity and not risking a run-on sentence with unnecessary commas. Every middle school teacher would have found the difference between "know" and "no" to be worthy of a deduction. I don't think you need to be perfect, and I really hope you didn't take it that way. If you're going to defend your grammar just make it more or less right, that's all I'm saying. Don't be pissy, I also said both that I like what you bring to the board and that you are right about Victor. I'd hate to see how you deal with people who disagree with you AND think you should no the difference between those words. :harhar: Before you blow up just know I'm only playing with you.

Maybe Bedard for $5m base with the ability to earn $7m in incentives. Not 8 + 7, that's just too high. Bedard would be an okay option too. The point is that you're talking about doing nothing more than what the Sox did with Penny and Smoltz last year, just new faces to do the same thing.

I think Penny probably provided what anyone could have reasonably hoped for from "5th starter" type pitcher randomly selected to pitch in the 5th spot. He's as viable an option as Paul Byrd. To me the biggest problem was a matter of timing. The Sox were scuffling at just the time when they could have given Smoltz more time to show what he could do. Smoltz's performance in St. Louis has to be dejecting to any Sox fan. His 28K/1BB performance is totally different from what he showed in Boston. Perhaps it is familarity with the NL, or comfort in St. Louis or something else. His stuff didn't look horrible in Boston, but the results were. Overall I think people will ultimately make too much out of the Penny and Smoltz signings. I personally hope that Theo does something like this every year. Try rebuilding projects that provide a 6th and 7th starter to the team for depth. It's better than relying on Bowden or not being able to trade Masterson for V-Mart because he's the team's 4th starter. Perhaps next year it is Brandon Webb who gets the nod, who knows...

C'mon man. I understand missing the "s" in hate, but to get the words "no" and "know" wrong is pretty 3rd grade. I like what you bring to the table, but your grammar isn't just fine. That said, I agree about VMart. He's a good catcher. Not great behind the plate but that's okay.

Maybe, but maybe not. I don't see them parting with Exposito if they can help it, though they do have some catching depth in the minors. I think people on this site tend to be too myopic about who other players would want based on soxprospects.com ratings. MIL may see something they like in Kalish, or Lin or any one of the other hundred prospects this club has. For that matter, losing Reddick wouldn't be that big a deal BECAUSE they have Kalish (and Westmoreland) waiting in the wings and no obvious OF spots upcoming assuming Bay or Holliday are part of their plans moving forward. Frankly, I think that Bowden and Anderson is a very good haul for a team that is looking to add depth and start rebuilding. When you look at cost controlled players, a pitcher who is ready to start now who would move to the NL and the WARPS these guys produce, the Sox shouldn't have to pay triple in WARP what Fielder would give them.

I did, and I waffled on the spelling a few times actually. It looked weird for some reason with multiple O's. Anyway, about the Sox getting Fielder, I think they could get him without having to give up Buchholz and it would be a great fit. Fielder has proven that he's one of the NL's best hitters, he's young, left handed and his OBP has consistently been high enough that he would be a good fit on this team. I don't know much about his character, but this clubhouse is pretty solid and I'm confident he would stay in line. I bet they could do a package for a few guys that most of us don't care much about. Bowden, Anderson, + would probably do it.

That was my point. Not only will they not deal him now, they won't deal him in the future. He's nearly as valuable as any player they could possibly get back. If SD were to ask for Buchholz +++++ for Gonzalez, or Seattle asking for Buchholz +++++ for "He who shall not be named", it would be absurd for the sox to agree. Teams that wanted him should have acted already as he's been discussed at 3 straight trade deadlines. That ship has sailed, he's a key part of the rotation now. Casey Kelly will be the guy the Sox wave around now

I'm glad people are finally getting the picture about Buchholz. A pitcher who can more-than hold his own in the ALE, at his age, with Lester already in the rotation. Buchholz is untouchable, even for "he who shall not be named who is not named Valdomort", in my opinion. I don't expect teams to even continue asking for him, honestly.

No. That's not going to happen.

Who started that 2nd game for the Mariners? It always comes back around...

Thats football for you, IMO. Heroes made from small sample sizes and without appropriate credit given to teammates and bad plays made by the other team. It is frustrating to me at the college and pro level. McKnight looked like Reggie Bush out there, even when deep in their own end he came up with huge yards that few other players would have. USC is a very good team. In this game, and with this collegiate set-up, it doesn't matter how good USC actually IS, they managed to go on the road and pull one out in front of 100,000+. Overall, I love watching football but can't stand the hyperbole that announcers, sports radio and writers use to describe the game we all watch. The playcalling and coaching are as important as the performance of any one player on the field.