Valentine or Lamont?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxfan28. Show redsoxfan28's posts

    Valentine or Lamont?

    I don't care who they get from these two, but if I had to chose it would be Gene Lamont. He is what this team needs than a cheerleader like Bobby Valentine. If I had to guess, I would say Lamont would get the job.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from mrmojo1120. Show mrmojo1120's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    Lamont would be fun to have as a manger.Every time he messed up we could say "Lamont,you big dummy!!"


     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from traven. Show traven's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    In Response to Re: Valentine or Lamont?:
    [QUOTE]Lamont would be fun to have as a manger.Every time he messed up we could say "Lamont,you big dummy!!"
    Posted by mrmojo1120[/QUOTE]

    Good one.  I sort of think the Sox will go for Valentine and the experience.  Besides he will be the only one that can cuss out Dice-K in his own language.  Maybe he can light a fire under him.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from summerof67. Show summerof67's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    Nah if something goes wrong, we'll all go - "It's the big one, Elizabeth!"


     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from raider3524. Show raider3524's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    bobby valentine...100%
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from michaelsjr. Show michaelsjr's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    Sounds like Cherington is chafing over all the recent articles and is not yet willing to say grace over the owner's choice of Valentine.  My personal choice is Valentine, but sadly my phone isn't ringing with a call from the front office asking my opinion.  Whoever they choose, I'm just ready for them to announce it so we can please turn the page.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from soxnewmex. Show soxnewmex's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    Prefer Lamont.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from MadMc44. Show MadMc44's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    Lamont might be a good compromise manager. I would be happy with either. I see Lamont as a little more conservative. This might be a crushing loss for Bobby V if he dosen't get the job.

     I would like to view the Press Conferences with Lamont and V does anyone have any idea where they might be?
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from jackyldo. Show jackyldo's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    Don't mistake  Valentine's enthusiasm  for being only about himself.
    He knows the game, and  treats the players as they should be treated, as highly paid professionals  expected to produce at their best level.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Yaso#7. Show Yaso#7's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    Forget both of them--- Luvello would be the best choice.
     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    Valentine is the better choice. My concern is how the players will respond. It will be like night and day, the personality difference from Francona, But I do believe this team needs a leader who is much more vociferous and emotional.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from OnDeckCircle. Show OnDeckCircle's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    In Response to Valentine or Lamont?:
    [QUOTE]I don't care who they get from these two, but if I had to chose it would be Gene Lamont. He is what this team needs than a cheerleader like Bobby Valentine. If I had to guess, I would say Lamont would get the job.
    Posted by redsoxfan28[/QUOTE]

    I agree.   Valentine is a stick of dynamite ready to go off.    I can see shouting matches in the dugout with him at the helm.
    If Francona had issues with a player it was settled in his office behind closed doors.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from J-BAY. Show J-BAY's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

     Ownership and Charington had spoken with Valentine a few weeks ago in Hartford CT, but didn't formally interview him until two weeks and 5 candidates later. I thought he was the front runner, but if his press conference is any indication of how well he interviewed, he may not be. The FO announced yesterday they decided to bring Lamont back for a second interview later this week.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from HOFFBURGER. Show HOFFBURGER's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    Obviously I'm riding the Bobby V train...Edes over on ESPN spoke about a potential compromise choice of pairing Lamont with Lovullo (as bench coach to learn for a few years under Lamont). Well, what about just pairing Lovullo with Valentine in the same type of setup? Bobby knows his stuff as a tactician, and presumably would be a solid mentor to Lovullo provided he's willing. 

    I respect Lamonts experience, but just curious if his personality is cut out to handle the pressures of this market, dont really know much about him in that regard. Also, at least on the surface it would appear that Valentine might give them the better blend of old school experience to go with the new wave of advanced statistical anaysis. 

    Who knows, I'm not sitting in on interviews and havent gotten to know these guys the way the sox brass has, but my choice for this team right now as it currently stands is Bobby Valentine. 
     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    Union Baby sitter is what modern managing is about. Gm is the most important manager in modern baseball.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    I have come full circle on Valentine.  The potential to crash and burn in fiery disaster is what first had me saying NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! to the thought of Bobby V.  But, given that there is that possibility, there is also the possibility that he is absolutely right, given the sox world, the market, and the current state of the club.  So, the experiment has the potential for both great success and disaster.  And, at the end of the day, as a fan, I think I prefer that to a middle-of-the-road-hedge-bet-compromise, which is how I see the other current candidates (granted, I really know nothing).  But why not Bobby V?  It will, no matter what, be very, very interesting.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from summerof67. Show summerof67's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    In Response to Re: Valentine or Lamont?:
    [QUOTE]I have come full circle on Valentine.  The potential to crash and burn in fiery disaster is what first had me saying NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! to the thought of Bobby V.  But, given that there is that possibility, there is also the possibility that he is absolutely right, given the sox world, the market, and the current state of the club.  So, the experiment has the potential for both great success and disaster.  And, at the end of the day, as a fan, I think I prefer that to a middle-of-the-road-hedge-bet-compromise, which is how I see the other current candidates (granted, I really know nothing).  But why not Bobby V?  It will, no matter what, be very, very interesting.
    Posted by SpacemanEephus[/QUOTE]

    I agree, Space. I am on the Bobby V train today. And tomorrow. Let's give him the reins and see what he does with them.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    In Response to Re: Valentine or Lamont?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Valentine or Lamont? : I agree, Space. I am on the Bobby V train today. And tomorrow. Let's give him the reins and see what he does with them.
    Posted by summerof67[/QUOTE]

    Goin' off the rails on the crazy train.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from J-BAY. Show J-BAY's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    Space and 67, the potential problem is; can  Valentine and Lucchino live in peace and harmony. They seem to be one in the same, which is usually a recipe for disaster. Also, with Valentines strong personality, is Cherington up to it?
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    Cherington is what it will be about, not the manager.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    In Response to Re: Valentine or Lamont?:
    [QUOTE]Space and 67, the potential problem is; can  Valentine and Lucchino live in peace and harmony. They seem to be one in the same, which is usually a recipe for disaster. Also, with Valentines strong personality, is Cherington up to it?
    Posted by J-BAY[/QUOTE]

    I agree with these misgivings J-BAY.  As I said, it could be a good fit, or it could be a horrendous disaster.  I cannot answer these questions.  But, I do know one thing for sure.  It will be interesting.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    In Response to Re: Valentine or Lamont?:
    [QUOTE]Space and 67, the potential problem is; can  Valentine and Lucchino live in peace and harmony. They seem to be one in the same, which is usually a recipe for disaster. Also, with Valentines strong personality, is Cherington up to it?
    Posted by J-BAY[/QUOTE]
    Wait and see.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    I don't don't think that BC is a real GM in the strictest sense of the word. Otherwise, why wouldn't ownership bring in someone with far more experience.
    The conventional wisdom is that Lucchino is running things and Charlatan will do whatever he is told, like going down personally to the Dominican, when a scout would have served just as well. IMO, he was sent so ownership could grease the skids for Valentine, who I believe is who Lucchino wants. Bringing back Lamont for another interview is nothing but window dressing to make BC look like he has some say in the decision process.
    If anyone here things Ben Cherington has any autonomy, you are sadly mistaken. He is nothing but a toady.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share