Jump to content

Fire Chris Getz


South Side Hit Men

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, T R U said:

So were all over here having a meltdown on the Dolphins message board I post on and one of the posters made an excellent comment about the Dolphins GM that I think fits absolutely perfect with the White Sox situation.

"It's hard to blame Grier for one reason.

He didn't force himself into this position.

Someone hired him and someone refuses to acknowledge Grier has some serious liabilities. You can't fault Grier for taking a high level job if someone's going to give it to him.

The problem is above Grier's paygrade."

It's true, but it also doesn't remove all guilt from Getz. Part of the job. He may be unqualified, and I can separate two different things. 1. He shouldn't be in this job and Jerry is the one that deserves heat  & 2. Getz is still the one making decisions, and we can be upset with those decisions. We can be mad at both. 

But I agree with the general principle that I don't blame Getz for accepting the job. That's not on him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/11/2024 at 4:58 AM, Dick Allen said:

 Considering they are 6-46 their last 52, it would seem impossible to hit the 40 win mark. They currently might even be worse than their record.

It does worry me that there are nine games against Oakland and California, even though they are both 25 games better than the Sox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/11/2024 at 12:49 PM, LittleHurtCG said:

One of those playoff appearances was the covid year and deserves an asterik. TLR got the most out of the players and mircalously won the division the next year. Two playoff appearances with no series wins is not a successful rebuild in no, way, shape, or form. Even more so due to the fact that Hahn was trying to emulate the Cubs and Astros rebuild. 

Also they expanded the playoffs that one-off year.  They don’t get in without expanded playoffs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, FloydBannister1983 said:

Also they expanded the playoffs that one-off year.  They don’t get in without expanded playoffs.

Actually, they would have. They had the second best record non-division leading teams so they would have been second wild card team. They just had a lower seed due to Second Place teams being seeded higher, and the Sox being the third best team in their division (tied for 2nd with Cleve but Clev had the better H2H record).

Now, if they had to actually play a full season and had to go through that grind, they would not have made it to the playoffs.

Edited by Bob Sacamano
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, FloydBannister1983 said:

It does worry me that there are nine games against Oakland and California, even though they are both 25 games better than the Sox.

Even if they do the impossible and get a streak against these bad teams going, they remain #1 in all of our hearts as the worst team we have ever fucking seen in our lives 

  • Like 5
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Tony said:

It's true, but it also doesn't remove all guilt from Getz. Part of the job. He may be unqualified, and I can separate two different things. 1. He shouldn't be in this job and Jerry is the one that deserves heat  & 2. Getz is still the one making decisions, and we can be upset with those decisions. We can be mad at both. 

But I agree with the general principle that I don't blame Getz for accepting the job. That's not on him. 

Oh for sure, Getz has been terrible. I just meant the root cause of the problem is JR, but we all knew that anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

Even if they do the impossible and get a streak against these bad teams going, they remain #1 in all of our hearts as the worst team we have ever fucking seen in our lives 

Yeah these bad teams are still 27 and 31 games better than the White Sox lol. They need to go 10-5 to avoid 120 losses which is, as you said, impossible.

I think 5-10 is their best case scenario at this point.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also on a funny note, the Angels suck. They have 4 wins in their last 10 games while the White Sox have 6 wins since July 10th

So yeah, these are bad teams they're playing but in perspective they are considerably better than the Sox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, T R U said:

Also on a funny note, the Angels suck. They have 4 wins in their last 10 games while the White Sox have 6 wins since July 10th

So yeah, these are bad teams they're playing but in perspective they are considerably better than the Sox.

Look, "bad" 99.9% of the time is what the Angels are, but the Sox are like a 7th standard deviation fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, T R U said:

Yeah these bad teams are still 27 and 31 games better than the White Sox lol. They need to go 10-5 to avoid 120 losses which is, as you said, impossible.

I think 5-10 is their best case scenario at this point.

The Angels being 27 games better than the White Sox is like a 92 win team playing a 65 win team. In that case, the better team is probably going to win most of the games, but they'd be happy going 4-2 and winning both series, it's still not a blowout, and sometimes the worse team might still win 3 or 4 games. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

The Angels being 27 games better than the White Sox is like a 92 win team playing a 65 win team. In that case, the better team is probably going to win most of the games, but they'd be happy going 4-2 and winning both series, it's still not a blowout, and sometimes the worse team might still win 3 or 4 games. 

The White Sox have won 3 or 4 games per month since July. I think a 65 win team would probably be insulted to be used in a comparison with whatever were putting out on the field.

Edited by T R U
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, T R U said:

The White Sox have won 3 or 4 games per month since July. I think a 65 win team would probably be insulted to be used in a comparison with whatever were putting out on the field.

"Per month"? You're also exaggerating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Tony said:

It's true, but it also doesn't remove all guilt from Getz. Part of the job. He may be unqualified, and I can separate two different things. 1. He shouldn't be in this job and Jerry is the one that deserves heat  & 2. Getz is still the one making decisions, and we can be upset with those decisions. We can be mad at both. 

But I agree with the general principle that I don't blame Getz for accepting the job. That's not on him. 

Getz only got this opportunity by snitching out the incompetence of his direct managers while at the same time not acknowledging his own shortcomings as the head of our player development function.  He partially deserves blame for taking advantage of stubborn, gullible old man.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...