Bobby Jenks to the Red Sox

[BigSqwert]

You've got to add some extra details there though.

 

Let's say the secrets you leaked were to smear an ex-employee. And that Ex-employee had been going around bashing your company.

 

In that case, the CEO might well be telling the guy to keep it up, as long as there's enough distance between him and the leak that he has plausible deniability.

Except that the the guy is using smears about things that only an officer of the company would know.

[iamshack]

Balta, do you really think that the very ordinary and commonplace criticisms Bobby made really upset the White Sox organization enough that they would secretly be applauding this attack on Bobby's personal life?

 

I know Kenny has gone after players publicly in the past before, but I sincerely hope that the Organization has more class than to be pleased with this outcome.

[southsider2k5]

I don't care about the fact they are all adults and the kids can say what they want and should have no bearing on what happens with Ozzie.

 

If your dad worked for let's say Motorola and was one of the high ranking, high profile officers.

And you decided to do nothing but publicly criticize Motorola. Including telling secrets that were only known to those in the board room. Don't you think at some point, the CEO or someone would tell you to tell your kid to lay off.

 

Oh and I lost a lot of respect for Cowley. He is coddling his video game buddy Oney and also protecting perhaps one of his inside sources. I am starting to feel like the Guillen kids are the Kardashians. No real usefulness other than to be leeches ands live off their parents' fame.

 

The problem is the dads bosses hired the kid. Whether the kid is told to be quiet or not, the company assumes responsibility for the guys they hire.

[BigSqwert]

The problem is the dads bosses hired the kid. Whether the kid is told to be quiet or not, the company assumes responsibility for the guys they hire.

And if your son were to pull something like this publicly to humiliate your family you would blame the company for hiring your son?

[southsider2k5]

And if your son were to pull something like this publicly to humiliate your family you would blame the company for hiring your son?

 

That is immaterial honestly. The kid is 25 years old. Like I said before if 25 isn't old enough to be responsible for your own actions, how old is?

[iamshack]

The problem is the dads bosses hired the kid. Whether the kid is told to be quiet or not, the company assumes responsibility for the guys they hire.

They hired him to work in the video-editing room or something. It's not like he was hired to be an Assistant GM or Director of Player Development or something. They did not hire Oney because he is some rising star in the baseball industry. This was clearly a favor done for Ozzie and Oney, and the kid has done nothing but make them pay for it, both while he was an employee, and after they fired him.

 

The fact that they actually had to fire Ozzie's son - think about that - they actually had to fire the manager's kid, shows just how bad the situation had become. Whether you want to argue that they share some blame for the kid being a complete asshat or not, it's pretty clear that he has become such a distraction and such a negative influence, that the White Sox were willing to take a pretty extraordinary step in getting rid of him. If he keeps this up, would it not follow that they would have to take an even more extraordinary step and fire Ozzie?

 

The fact that Kenny and Jerry were actually considering trading Ozzie, and then admitted it publicly, makes it pretty clear that Ozzie is on thin ice. JR is probably one of the most loyal owners in all of sports, and it's pretty clear that Ozzie and the Guillen family has tested his patience to the point of him considering Ozzie's dismissal. Parse out blame however you want, and say that Ozzie is not technically responsible for this because the White Sox employed his son, but one would have to think that this is just one more notch against the Guillen family, and at some point it's going to be one notch too many.

Edited December 31, 2010 by iamshack

[southsider2k5]

They hired him to work in the video-editing room or something. It's not like he was hired to be an Assistant GM or Director of Player Development or something. They did not hire Oney because he is some rising star in the baseball industry. This was clearly a favor done for Ozzie and Oney, and the kid has done nothing but make them pay for it, both while he was an employee, and after they fired him.

 

The fact that they actually had to fire Ozzie's son - think about that - they actually had to fire the manager's kid, shows just how bad the situation had become. Whether you want to argue that they share some blame for the kid being a complete asshat or not, it's pretty clear that he has become such a distraction and such a negative influence, that the White Sox were willing to take a pretty extraordinary step in getting rid of him. If he keeps this up, would it not follow that they would have to take an even more extraordinary step and fire Ozzie?

 

The fact that Kenny and Jerry were actually considering trading Ozzie, and then admitted it publicly, makes it pretty clear that Ozzie is on thin ice. JR is probably one of the most loyal owners in all of sports, and it's pretty clear that Ozzie and the Guillen family has tested his patience to the point of him considering Ozzie's dismissal. Parse out blame however you want, and say that Ozzie is not technically responsible for this because the White Sox employed his son, but one would have to think that this is just one more notch against the Guillen family, and at some point it's going to be one notch too many.

 

They were going to trade him for Mike Stanton. I don't care if he was angelic, you trade your manager for Mike Stanton. Its not like we were talking about trading him for a Sun Times columnist to be named later.

 

The rest of it has all been repeated ad nasuem. I hear the end of the world stuff with Ozzie, I just don't buy it. I'm just saying this has been going on for the better part of a decade now. Hell what happened with Magglio was WAY worse than this and Ozzie kept his job. He pretty much spilled that Maggs was a juicer, and nothing happen. Plus, that was before he got a team into the playoffs, let alone with a world series title. Ozzie gets fired when the team sucks, and not before.

[iamshack]

They were going to trade him for Mike Stanton. I don't care if he was angelic, you trade your manager for Mike Stanton. Its not like we were talking about trading him for a Sun Times columnist to be named later.

 

The rest of it has all been repeated ad nasuem. I hear the end of the world stuff with Ozzie, I just don't buy it. I'm just saying this has been going on for the better part of a decade now. Hell what happened with Magglio was WAY worse than this and Ozzie kept his job. He pretty much spilled that Maggs was a juicer, and nothing happen. Plus, that was before he got a team into the playoffs, let alone with a world series title. Ozzie gets fired when the team sucks, and not before.

Speaking of Angelic, I don't think the Angels would trade Mike Scoscia for Mike Stanton, I don't think the Yankees would trade Joe Girardi for Mike Stanton, I don't think the Rays would trade Joe Maddon for Mike Stanton. Trading a manager who has been with your club for a number of years shows a major change in direction and philosophy. You don't do that for some prospect, I don't care how promising he looks. There is no recent examples or history of this occuring and there is a reason for it.

 

As for the other points, yeah, we're just butting heads at this point. Agree to disagree.

[Balta1701]

Balta, do you really think that the very ordinary and commonplace criticisms Bobby made really upset the White Sox organization enough that they would secretly be applauding this attack on Bobby's personal life?

 

I know Kenny has gone after players publicly in the past before, but I sincerely hope that the Organization has more class than to be pleased with this outcome.

I really do see your guys side on Oney. You're right, he's out of line for the public face of any organization.

 

But I will still say that if I were in that locker room, or in that front office, I would be somewhere between less than really outraged and quietly content about this turn of events, based in no small part on the fact that Bobby's off the field issues affected his performance last year.

 

Call it the "Scooter Libby" premise. Yeah, the guy may have broken the law, but he did so while smearing a guy going after his bosses.

[BigSqwert]

I really do see your guys side on Oney. You're right, he's out of line for the public face of any organization.

 

But I will still say that if I were in that locker room, or in that front office, I would be somewhere between less than really outraged and quietly content about this turn of events, based in no small part on the fact that Bobby's off the field issues affected his performance last year.

 

Call it the "Scooter Libby" premise. Yeah, the guy may have broken the law, but he did so while smearing a guy going after his bosses.

So you blame Bobby for not performing last year? Ozzie, who knew all of Bobby's problems about drinking and marital issues, was the one that kept trotting him out to fail. Why would the locker room be mad at Bobby? Ozzie is the one that set him up for failure.

[iamshack]

I really do see your guys side on Oney. You're right, he's out of line for the public face of any organization.

 

But I will still say that if I were in that locker room, or in that front office, I would be somewhere between less than really outraged and quietly content about this turn of events, based in no small part on the fact that Bobby's off the field issues affected his performance last year.

 

Call it the "Scooter Libby" premise. Yeah, the guy may have broken the law, but he did so while smearing a guy going after his bosses.

I really don't think that these players are upset with Bobby for the way he performed last year. He wasn't so horribly bad that it was clear he simply couldn't pitch because of whatever these personal problems were. I think it's assuming a lot to think they would be angry at him in any way. It's not like he had a complete meltdown or went after some of his teammates or anything. I think these guys are human beings that are not immune to personal issues just like any of us aren't, and that his teammates understand that.

 

If anyone was really hurt by the comments Bobby made, my guess is it was Ozzie, because I think they really did have a quasi father-son type relationship, and I am sure that is why Oney spazzed out as much as he did. The Guillen's sort of welcomed Bobby into their family, and when Bobby slipped-up a bit personally and struggled on the field, he couldn't understand why Ozzie wasn't unconditionally supportive of him, which then led to the rift that's been going on. It's a situation that unfortunately has not had a happy ending, but I doubt that anyone is happy about what Oney did now that the dust has settled a bit.

[knightni]

Speaking of Angelic, I don't think the Angels would trade Mike Scoscia for Mike Stanton, I don't think the Yankees would trade Joe Girardi for Mike Stanton, I don't think the Rays would trade Joe Maddon for Mike Stanton. Trading a manager who has been with your club for a number of years shows a major change in direction and philosophy. You don't do that for some prospect, I don't care how promising he looks. There is no recent examples or history of this occuring and there is a reason for it.

 

As for the other points, yeah, we're just butting heads at this point. Agree to disagree.

 

Every one of those teams would give up their manager for Stanton. Managers are fired for non-baseball things such as disagreeing with the GM's style or, arguing with a player. Stanton under team control for 4 or 5 years is easily worth a manager.

[iamshack]

Every one of those teams would give up their manager for Stanton. Managers are fired for non-baseball things such as disagreeing with the GM's style or, arguing with a player. Stanton under team control for 4 or 5 years is easily worth a manager.

Well, I suppose I should just come right out and admit that we really have no precedent for this and so neither of us really knows for sure.

 

But I disagree.

 

I cannot imagine what would happen if one of those teams was to trade the contract of their manager for a prospect and then that prospect didn't pan out. Or if that prospect broke his leg and was never the same player again. I think these organizations are far too greatful for what their managers have done for them, even so much as they will allow that manager to handle a prospect as they see fit, or trade away a prospect that was seen as the organization's best prospect, because of a clash with said manager, in order to keep the manager in place.

 

[southsider2k5]

Well, I suppose I should just come right out and admit that we really have no precedent for this and so neither of us really knows for sure.

 

But I disagree.

 

I cannot imagine what would happen if one of those teams was to trade the contract of their manager for a prospect and then that prospect didn't pan out. Or if that prospect broke his leg and was never the same player again. I think these organizations are far too greatful for what their managers have done for them, even so much as they will allow that manager to handle a prospect as they see fit, or trade away a prospect that was seen as the organization's best prospect, because of a clash with said manager, in order to keep the manager in place.

 

Managers have been traded in the past. Lou Pinella comes to mind immediately.

[iamshack]

Managers have been traded in the past. Lou Pinella comes to mind immediately.

And the Devil Rays traded Wynn for him because they could not afford Wynn and they were trying to gain some legitimacy in any way possible.

 

What we are discussing is the complete opposite scenario.

[southsider2k5]

And the Devil Rays traded Wynn for him because they could not afford Wynn and they were trying to gain some legitimacy in any way possible.

 

What we are discussing is the complete opposite scenario.

 

The Marlins aren't trying to gain some legitimacy by trading for Guillen in south Florida's market? Remember they came to us with the idea. We just told them who it would take to make it happen.

[Kyyle23]

Managers have been traded in the past. Lou Pinella comes to mind immediately.

 

Kind of a unique situation. Lou wanted to go home to Florida and Seattle wanted to be compensated for their manager. Its not like this happens frequently, or even much at all. To say with all certainty that all of those teams would gladly give up their manager for 5 years of a PROSPECT, no matter how highly touted, is hyperbolic at the very least.

[iamshack]

The Marlins aren't trying to gain some legitimacy by trading for Guillen in south Florida's market? Remember they came to us with the idea. We just told them who it would take to make it happen.

The Marlins have won two WS titles in their brief history. I'd say they've gained their legitimacy already.

 

Seattle wasn't seeking to trade Lou anyways. Lou was the one who wanted to leave.

 

The situations aren't analogous other than the fact that a manager was exchanged for a player as compensation. What you're saying is that the Angels/Rays/Yankees would trade their manager for Mike Stanton. That's not even close to being the same thing.

[ptatc]

So you blame Bobby for not performing last year? Ozzie, who knew all of Bobby's problems about drinking and marital issues, was the one that kept trotting him out to fail. Why would the locker room be mad at Bobby? Ozzie is the one that set him up for failure.

 

The only way to help Bobby with personal problems was to try to make a positive work environment. Ozzie tried to do this. I don't fault Ozzie. I have a number of problems with things Ozzie does but trying to take care of his players isn't one of them. You can't help someone by making the life more miserable.

[southsider2k5]

The Marlins have won two WS titles in their brief history. I'd say they've gained their legitimacy already.

 

Seattle wasn't seeking to trade Lou anyways. Lou was the one who wanted to leave.

 

The situations aren't analogous other than the fact that a manager was exchanged for a player as compensation. What you're saying is that the Angels/Rays/Yankees would trade their manager for Mike Stanton. That's not even close to being the same thing.

 

Actually before all of the pointless tangents, the point was that the Marlins asking us for Guillen doesn't diminish his value. Us asking for a top 10 prospect to make that happen doesn't change that either.

 

But back to the non sequitor, I would imagine if the Yankees got offered a Stanton for Girardi type of deal, Joe would be gone. Hell they let Torre walkaway for nothing. If anyone sees managers as interchangeable it is the yankees. The Rays have already traded a manager for a player, even knowing he wanted to be there. I have no idea what the Angels would do.

[iamshack]

Actually before all of the pointless tangents, the point was that the Marlins asking us for Guillen doesn't diminish his value. Us asking for a top 10 prospect to make that happen doesn't change that either.

 

But back to the non sequitor, I would imagine if the Yankees got offered a Stanton for Girardi type of deal, Joe would be gone. Hell they let Torre walkaway for nothing. If anyone sees managers as interchangeable it is the yankees. The Rays have already traded a manager for a player, even knowing he wanted to be there. I have no idea what the Angels would do.

 

Well, that is the point as you see it.

 

The point as I see it is that it would have never been publicly admitted to if not to show Ozzie that he wasn't invincible. It never had anything to do with Ozzie having any "value" or not. Perhaps this is the source of our disagreement here; you keep fabricating points I supposedly made previously.

 

 

[southsider2k5]

Well, that is the point as you see it.

 

The point as I see it is that it would have never been publicly admitted to if not to show Ozzie that he wasn't invincible. It never had anything to do with Ozzie having any "value" or not. Perhaps this is the source of our disagreement here; you keep fabricating points I supposedly made previously.

 

What manager is "invincible"? If anyone knows that they can get dumped, it is Ozzie.

[iamshack]

What manager is "invincible"? If anyone knows that they can get dumped, it is Ozzie.

His actions certainly seem to belie that idea.

[southsider2k5]

His actions certainly seem to belie that idea.

 

It tells me that his top worry isn't managing the Sox, and that he would rather do things his way and be out, than to not and still have a job.

[iamshack]

It tells me that his top worry isn't managing the Sox, and that he would rather do things his way and be out, than to not and still have a job.

While that may indeed be the case, he strikes me more as a guy who's head has become a bit too large to fit through the door anymore.

 

There is a difference between "doing things your way" and acting recklessly.

 

In my humble opinion, the behavior of the Guillen family over the past year or 18 months would be characterized more towards the latter.