VAfan

Idiot, moron. You throw these words around in a way that demeans you. And then you complain about the horrible treatment your wife has received. If you want a civil society that doesn't demean people, try creating one with your comments.

Are you suggesting the players should pick the manager?

If you changed his phrase to "observational analysis" it would be 100% correct. You are nitpicking over a word. Tony has always used data. He said yesterday that "information is king." Plus, as someone above wrote, if analytics were all there were to managing, IBM Watson should manage. It's not. Tony has more experience at managing a club, a season, a pitching staff, a series, and a game than anyone else out there, working or not. You also denigrate the power of the human mind. Now, there's no guarantee LaRussa is going to work out. But his track record should have earned him more respect than is being accorded him by you and a lot of others here. Tony LaRussa is no "idiot" and you demean yourself by calling him one.

LaRussa did it for 33 years and 5,000+ games. But other than that correction, well said.

He was apparently the first baseball player to kneel.

"WE, WE, WE"...... I think it was in the Jason Benetti interview, though it could have been the press conference. LaRussa was asked about his accomplishments and he deflected to say they were all group accomplishments of the coaching staff and the team. The point is, we're so focused on LaRussa, but the Sox' success is going to also depend a lot on all the other coaches, especially the pitching coach, the bench coach, the hitting coach, the bullpen coach, the third and first base coaches, the training staff, etc., etc. The Sox have cleared house enough to allow LaRussa to help shape those hires, and it would seem like a very attractive job for anyone wanting to learn from one of the most successful managers of all time, so the Sox should be able to attract top candidates. LaRussa has the most important job, but it's just one of many. We have to see what the group looks like.

You don't think Tony LaRussa knows who is on the roster???? The man does his homework. How else do you think he's been so successful? Of course he knows the roster. He may not have watched all the games, but he knows who is on the team. He wouldn't have been interested in the job unless it had the right makeup of youth, guys coming into their prime, and vets.

Tony is not an idiot when it comes to baseball. What he's talking about is using his eyes, his experience, along with all the data he's aware of to analyze the situations within a game to make decisions. And observation is how scientists arrive at a lot of the data that make up analytics.

How is it the "opposite"? The Sox have hired a manager with experience, WS titles, 6 pennants, led 12 90+ win teams, in the Hall of Fame, will be second-winningest manager of all time this year, and by far the winningest manager since baseball integrated. He's bilingual. The only other WS titled managers on the sidelines were both banned from the game in 2020 for their roles in the worst team-wide cheating scandal in the history of the game. If one of them had been hired, it would have had its own set of repercussions. LaRussa may or may not work. But given his track record, he deserves a lot more respect than Sox fans are giving him.

Don't call me an idiot. Not even sure why I'm responding, but that's juvenile. Whatever you call it, when you are watching the game, the right move or non-move is not always what the "analytics" say to do. Cash blundered the other night, just like AJ Hinch blundered last year in the World Series. Both pulled starters who were cruising only to watch the bullpen blow the game.

Just going to post this here. I wrote it on the Pro-LaRussa thread. ************** I can't believe all the nonsense being written about Tony LaRussa. Nearly all of it comes from people who have no concept of what it takes to be a major league manager. It's entirely possible that this won't work out. But no one knows that. A lot of people hated the Sox decision to extend Jose Abreu for 3 years. Where are you now, after his MVP season? Tony LaRussa has a record that puts him solidly in the conversation for most accomplished manager of all time. I mean, I think you have to discount any manager from the whites-only era of baseball, before Jackie Robinson integrated the game. They might have put up some great numbers, but it was a racist game. If you look only at managers after 1950, for sheer volume of wins and championships, you only have LaRussa and Sparky Anderson, each of whom won 3 WS titles with teams from both the AL and NL. But LaRussa's accomplishments are much deeper and more impressive than Anderson's. Perhaps Bruce Bochy deserves mention with 4,000+ games, but he has a career losing record and won with only the Giants and Ross Bumgardner. LaRussa v. Sparky 2,728 wins v. 2,194 wins. 3 WS titles v. 3 WS Titles. But Anderson did it with two squads - back-to-back with the Reds and 1984 with the Tigers. LaRussa had a dominant Oakland team that won 3 pennants in a row and a WS in between. But the Cardinals WS victories were 6 years apart. LaRussa also led the White Sox to 99 wins with the 1983 "winning ugly" squad. 4x manager of year v 2x manager of year 5,093 games v. 4,028 games The list can go on. The point is that Tony LaRussa's stature and record as a manager should have earned him some respect. He knows vastly more about baseball and people than anyone on this blog who denigrates him. I'll bet a lot of the critics here weren't even alive when he started managing in 1979. I don't know how this is going to turn out. Nor does anyone else. But I'm willing to see what happens. I'd certainly take LaRussa over the cheaters Hinch and Cora. Hinch got outmanaged last year by Dave Martinez, and Cora as the instigator of the cheating is beyond redemption. As a white guy, LaRussa is also bilingual, which is critical for this clubhouse. He won't need a translator. As for the kneeling issue, LaRussa answered that question in the press conference and Jason Benetti interview. He's changed his views. He also praised Tim Anderson for the energy and passion he brings to the game. LaRussa couldn't have managed so successfully over 3 different teams, 33 years, with countless different personalities if he didn't know how to navigate a clubhouse. It would seem that these players, if they are hungry to win, ought to be looking for leadership in that regard from LaRussa rather than demanding that he make changes for them, when they haven't accomplished anything as a team. I'm not saying they have to "fall in line" or anything like that. I just think there's an opportunity for a good marriage here because they want to win, and Tony LaRussa definitely wants to win. As for analytics, LaRussa just said at the press conference that "information is king." He's a lawyer. He's always had an analytical mind, and has always sought every edge. But he's not a blind adherent to data. He also applies "observational analytics" within a given game because he's watching what's going on. LaRussa doesn't have anything left to prove in baseball. But he still was itching for one more opportunity. That tells me he wanted this and will work hard to make it work. So, I'm not predicting this will work. It may, it may not. I think it has a good shot to succeed, but it will depend on the players, and getting better pitching. But I strongly feel that LaRussa has more than earned the chance, and is not deserving of the heap of scorn being dumped on him by Sox fans.

I can't believe all the nonsense being written about Tony LaRussa. Nearly all of it comes from people who have no concept of what it takes to be a major league manager. It's entirely possible that this won't work out. But no one knows that. A lot of people hated the Sox decision to extend Jose Abreu for 3 years. Where are you now, after his MVP season? Tony LaRussa has a record that puts him solidly in the conversation for most accomplished manager of all time. I mean, I think you have to discount any manager from the whites-only era of baseball, before Jackie Robinson integrated the game. They might have put up some great numbers, but it was a racist game. If you look only at managers after 1950, for sheer volume of wins and championships, you only have LaRussa and Sparky Anderson, each of whom won 3 WS titles with teams from both the AL and NL. But LaRussa's accomplishments are much deeper and more impressive than Anderson's. Perhaps Bruce Bochy deserves mention with 4,000+ games, but he has a career losing record and won with only the Giants and Ross Bumgardner. LaRussa v. Sparky 2,728 wins v. 2,194 wins. 3 WS titles v. 3 WS Titles. But Anderson did it with two squads - back-to-back with the Reds and 1984 with the Tigers. LaRussa had a dominant Oakland team that won 3 pennants in a row and a WS in between. But the Cardinals WS victories were 6 years apart. LaRussa also led the White Sox to 99 wins with the 1983 "winning ugly" squad. 4x manager of year v 2x manager of year 5,093 games v. 4,028 games The list can go on. The point is that Tony LaRussa's stature and record as a manager should have earned him some respect. He knows vastly more about baseball and people than anyone on this blog who denigrates him. I'll bet a lot of the critics here weren't even alive when he started managing in 1979. I don't know how this is going to turn out. Nor does anyone else. But I'm willing to see what happens. I'd certainly take LaRussa over the cheaters Hinch and Cora. Hinch got outmanaged last year by Dave Martinez, and Cora as the instigator of the cheating is beyond redemption. As a white guy, LaRussa is also bilingual, which is critical for this clubhouse. He won't need a translator. As for the kneeling issue, LaRussa answered that question in the press conference and Jason Benetti interview. He's changed his views. He also praised Tim Anderson for the energy and passion he brings to the game. LaRussa couldn't have managed so successfully over 3 different teams, 33 years, with countless different personalities if he didn't know how to navigate a clubhouse. It would seem that these players, if they are hungry to win, ought to be looking for leadership in that regard from LaRussa rather than demanding that he make changes for them, when they haven't accomplished anything as a team. I'm not saying they have to "fall in line" or anything like that. I just think there's an opportunity for a good marriage here because they want to win, and Tony LaRussa definitely wants to win. As for analytics, LaRussa just said at the press conference that "information is king." He's a lawyer. He's always had an analytical mind, and has always sought every edge. But he's not a blind adherent to data. He also applies "observational analytics" within a given game because he's watching what's going on. LaRussa doesn't have anything left to prove in baseball. But he still was itching for one more opportunity. That tells me he wanted this and will work hard to make it work. So, I'm not predicting this will work. It may, it may not. I think it has a good shot to succeed, but it will depend on the players, and getting better pitching. But I strongly feel that LaRussa has more than earned the chance, and is not deserving of the heap of scorn being dumped on him by Sox fans.

I'm guessing this will get lost in all the posts, but I'll just put this here for posterity. 1. Sign a stud starting pitcher. Bauer has been mentioned. If he only wants 1-year deals, perfect. It makes him easier to acquire. The Sox need 3 reliable workhorse starters. 2. Create a combination of major league and minor league pitching depth that will be needed to manage the back end of the rotation. For example, when Kopech makes the rotation, he won't be good for an entire season. So you have to have someone ready to fill the balance of that workload. But they can't just sit on the bench. They may need to be in the minors where they aren't using up a roster spot. The Sox have all these pitchers - Cease, Dunning, Lopez, Stiever, Crochet - who aren't likely to be 200 inning starters, but may be able to contribute. This is going to be the hardest part of the team to figure out. The Sox need to keep the best of these guys, and to have a lot of depth, as I expect they'll use as many as 10 starters next season. 3. Re-sign Colome if it doesn't break the bank. 4. Bring up Andrew Vaughn as the full time DH/1B platoon with Abreu. The Sox would have been much stronger this year if they'd done that instead of signing Encarnacion. Vaughn will give us a power bat who can also take pitches and draw walks in the middle of the order. 5. Upgrade RF with a lefty power bat. Not sure who this should be. I think Mazara had an off year and will be better. But he's too risky to rely on. 6. Make an offer to James McCann to see if he'll take it. 7. Re-sign Leury Garcia Overall, the Sox offense should be lights out in 2021. 1. Anderson has proven he's not a one-year fluke. 2. Moncada should bounce back with Covid behind him. 3. Abreu had an MVP year. He's unlikely to match it, but should continue producing. 4. Eloy Jimenez is getting better. Great protection for Abreu. 5. Grandall wasn't a monster hitter, but was the most patient hitter, and found his power stroke as the season went on. 6. Andrew Vaughn could make the biggest difference in this lineup in place of Encarnacion. Higher average, OBP, and power. 7. Luis Robert. Will he push his way up the lineup? Or will he just do tremendous damage here with plenty of guys on base ahead of him? 8. Mystery left-handed RF/Engel. 9. Nick Madrigal. You could make a case for him hitting second with his .340 batting average, ability to hit with two strikes, and ability to hit-and-run. If Moncada doesn't bounce back to 2019 form, maybe you should do this. But he's got plenty of value at the bottom where he turns over the lineup and gets on for the boppers behind him. Starters: Giolito, Bauer, Keuchel, Kopech, fill-in-the-blank (Crochet, Cease, Dunning, Lopez, etc.) Bullpen: Colome, Bummer, Marshall, Heuer, Crochet (if he's not ticketed to starting), Foster, etc. Bench: McCann? or Collins, Garcia, Engel, etc.

I'm sure Ozzie's name has come up in multiple "fire Ricky" posts, but I don't see a post dedicated to a debate about hiring Ozzie to replace him, so I'm starting one. My case for firing Renteria is as follows. 1. Renteria has to go because down the stretch in the series in Cleveland and in the playoff series against Oakland, he had no concept of how to manage in a tight game. As long as his guys were hitting homers and taking leads and he had good starting pitching and a deep bullpen, he could manage. But if things went off track and he needed to manufacture a run or two, or sort out his bullpen usage in a tight game, he failed miserably. If he can't win these kinds of games, he can't ever get the Sox to the World Series, because playoff series will inevitably be tight. My case for Ozzie is as follows. 1. Ozzie did exceedingly well managing the White Sox pitching during 2005. Granted, it was a staff with 4 stud starting pitchers who each threw more than 200 innings that year. In the ALCS, those 4 - Contreras, Buehrle, Garcia, and Garland threw 4 complete games in a row, which will never be done again, playoffs or regular season. But that doesn't mean Ozzie couldn't manage a bullpen. The Sox used 3 different primary closers in 2005, so Ozzie was able to adapt to what he had. 2. The 2005 Sox were tremendous in 1-run games. They also swept the Astros in the World Series, while only outscoring them by 6 total runs. They won three 1-0 games of note in that 2005 season - first game of year, first game after the All-Star break and last game of the World Series. This requires good managing. 3. The 2005 Sox knew how to bash home runs. But they also knew how to manufacture runs. Just think of a couple of runs that won postseason games. In the second game against the Angels in the ALCS, in the bottom of the 9th, after AJ Pierzynski reached first on a controversial dropped third strike, Ozzie pinch ran Pablo Ozuna for AJ, who stole second, and scored the walk-off win on a Joe Crede double to left field. In the WS clinching win against the Astros, Willie Harris hit a single, stole second, and scored on Jermaine Dye's single up the middle. It was the only run of the game. This also shows how Ozzie was able to use the "smurfs" - Harris, Ozuna, and Geoff Blum - in ways that helped the Sox to 3 postseason wins. In addition to Ozuna and Harris above, Geoff Blum hit the game winning HR in extra innings in game 3 of the World Series. Again, Ozzie knew what he was doing. 4. The 2005 White Sox were an excellent defensive team, so Ozzie knows the value of defense in winning games. That offseason, the Sox traded offense for defense, and it paid off. This White Sox team has been excellent defensively with Anderson making great strides at SS, and with Luis Robert in CF. 5. Ozzie is the only Sox manager alive today who has won a playoff series with the Sox. He was 11-1 in 2005, which is still the best postseason record in baseball. under that 3-round format. 6. Yes, Ozzie quit on the team at the end of his tenure and should have been fired. He was angling to manage Miami, which turned into a disaster. After 10 years, I don't hold this against Ozzie, and the Sox shouldn't either. Ozzie is back in the Sox fold as an announcer and would not mess up like this again. 7. If Renteria is replaced, the Sox need an Hispanic manager given how central the Cuban players are to the success of the team. 8. Ozzie is a loudmouth manager, who says a lot of crazy things. But there is a method to his madness. He always takes the pressure onto himself, and off of his players. He has their backs. I'm sure some will question whether Ozzie is fully up to speed on the new analytics which didn't exist when Ozzie was managing. But I think he would be based on the fact that he knew how to manage pitching, had a team that could bash HRs and play for a run, and excelled in 1-run games. Lastly, I will confess I don't live in Chicago, so I don't know much about what Ozzie has been doing lately outside of providing TV commentary. But whatever that may be, I think Ozzie would be laser focused should he get another shot at managing the Sox. It's not likely a marriage that will last 10 years. But there's no reason it can't last for the next 5, which is the Sox window to compete for World Series titles. My vote: Fire Ricky. Hire Ozzie.

Why? Makes no sense.

Doesn't anyone else see the masterstroke in having the Sox tank this series against Cleveland? We are now 2-8 against Cleveland. Even if we'd won 2 games, we would have been 4-6, with every game tight. As it stands now, the Sox are either going to hold on to second place in the AL Central, and host the Yankees in round one, or fall all the way to the 7th seed, and have to play Oakland or the Twins. It's possible we could still face the Indians in round one, but it's not likely any longer. Given how the Indians have shut down our offense, would you rather play them? P.S. I'm not defending Ricky here. Just making the observation that the Sox may have a better chance in the first round against anyone but Cleveland (and the Rays).

Winning the Division is important because you get a home 3-game series to start the playoffs. Winning the top seed is very different, and may be detrimental to the Sox hopes of advancing. At the moment, the Sox are the #2 seed, 1/2 game behind the Rays and a game ahead of Oakland. The Rays are likely to maintain their lead against the Yankees, and Oakland's lead over Houston isn't at risk. Plus the Sox have a lead of 4 games in the loss column over the Twins, plus the tiebreaker. So if the Sox win 5 of 9 to finish the season, they will win the Division. If only 4 of 9, we will win if the Twins lose 1 game of 7 left, etc. The ideal scenario may be for the Sox to fall to the 3rd seed, with the Rays staying #1, and Oakland #2. That would mean Houston would be the opening opponent. Maybe they'll be better in a week, but they have the worst record among the playoff teams at the moment. And by skipping Cleveland, we don't get Shane Bieber in a 3-game set. The second round would then be against the Oakland/Cleveland, or Oakland/Toronto winner. But if we get the #1 seed, we'll be looking at the potential for the Yankees in round two.

Here's the link. https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/29900872/2020-world-series-matchups-love-hate-see I'd have to agree with this choice.

The problem with ranking them by record, to some extent, is they didn't play common opponents this year. The Sox toughest opponents this year were likely Minnesota and Cleveland. We didn't have to play the Dodgers or San Diego. Of course we played 20 games against Twins and Tribe, but the point is the schedule is no balanced so it's hard to draw conclusions just on W-L record.

I was going to start a post, but this one, while not perfect, is close enough to the topic. Do the Sox want the #1 seed in the AL? It is possible it could draw the Blue Jays, who are seeded 7th right now, but only 1/2 game ahead of Cleveland. The Blue Jays would be a welcome first round opponent. But the weakest 1st round opponent in terms of record is Houston, who is 24-25. To slide to the 3rd spot and draw Houston, which is pretty locked into the 6th seed, would require the Sox to drop behind the Rays, who we lead by 1 game, and the A's, who we lead by 1.5 games, 2 in the loss column. If we fall to the 3rd seed, we not only get Houston, we then likely get Oakland, if the Rays end up with the #1 seed. What we avoid in the first two rounds are the potential to get Cleveland, not Toronto, and the Yankees, if they don't gain 4 games on the Rays in 11 games. Since the other seeds all might change, for now we have to root for the Sox to win enough to stay ahead of Minnesota for the division so we at least get 2-3 home games in the first round. But as we get closer to the playoffs, we're all going to start hoping things line up well for the Sox.

I've come around on Tim Anderson. So glad he's on the White Sox. I love how he moves around in the box to put himself in position to beat the pitcher. Wish more guys would do the same. Love his growing power, which may be his next level. Love how when he gets one hit, especially in his first at bat, it usually leads to several. Love his improving defense, which will continue to get better. Love his rah-rah leadership, and how he makes the game fun. Clearly this is a team of guys who love to have fun together while beating up their opponents. Love how he supports his community and gives back. I don't know how many posts I put up pining away for Fernando Tatis, Jr. No more!! I'm thrilled we have Tim Anderson, who just keeps getting better.

With Dyson, Goins is no longer needed as a pinch runner.

It is the next 17 games, not the next 12, that are against the dregs, except for 3 against Minnesota. Need to go 12-5. That would lock us up for a playoff spot of some kind.

Let's not forget that we owe Luis Robert being here and playing so well to Jose Abreu. From this article.

As of yesterday, here are Fernando Tatis, Jr's stats. 17 games, 76 PA, 67 AB, 15 R, 22 H, 4 2b, 1 3b, 8 HR (leading baseball), 18 RBI, 4 SB, 0 CS, .328 BA, .408 OBP, .776 SLG (leading baseball), 1.184 OPS, 229 OPS+ (leading baseball), 52 TB (leading baseball), 1.4 WAR. He also has no errors so far at SS. He's 21 years old. One could argue that Tatis Jr. is the BEST PLAYER IN BASEBALL right now. As my son said, if instead the question was - who would you pick first if you were starting a new franchise? - then Tatis Jr. would almost certainly be the guy. So, I apologize in posting this little rant, but every time I see this guy perform it just totally bums me out. And it keeps getting worse as he gets better. Because while the White Sox have some exciting young players and are on the upswing, the fact they don't ALSO have this guy may well leave us short. I would be better if any of our young guys were BETTER than Tatis Jr. But they aren't, and because Tatis Jr is still YOUNGER than all of them, they aren't ever likely to be. FFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU*******************************!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!