Valentine or Lamont?

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

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    Valetines managerial numbers are much more impressive than Lamont's.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    In Response to Re: Valentine or Lamont?:
    [QUOTE]I am ready for Bobby V., and BOSOX1941 none here will forget waht you say today just in case you ever turn on him  
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    Does this mean that Bosox1941 is taking a year off from the forum? The only reason that he ever participated in the forum in the past was to rant on about Francona. Is he capable of widening his talking points? I will be anxiously awaiting what he will talk about. Will the USB Parrot be placed into mothballs and into the attic?
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from brdbreu. Show brdbreu's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    In Response to Re: Valentine or Lamont?:
    [QUOTE]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.
    Posted by Alibiike[/QUOTE]

    especially papi if he takes the arbitration. seems like he may have to change a bit as well as the clubhouse beer pitchers
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from brdbreu. Show brdbreu's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    In Response to Re: Valentine or Lamont?:
    [QUOTE]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. 
    Posted by HOFFBURGER[/QUOTE]

    no just valenine until maddons contract is up
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from brdbreu. Show brdbreu's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    In Response to Re: Valentine or Lamont?:
    [QUOTE]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.
    Posted by Alibiike[/QUOTE]

    " Bringing back Lamont for another interview is nothing but window dressing to make BC look like he has some say in the decision process. "

    was my exact thinking.

    and i posted similar but less harsh opinion when tito was fired re: the rest of your comments above comments
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from brdbreu. Show brdbreu's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    In Response to Re: Valentine or Lamont?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Valentine or Lamont? : Au Contrare, spaceman, I am no upset in the least. I think Lucchino has a good baseball mind and the best interest of the club in mind. But there are many on here who think that Cherington knows what he is doing, and I beleive that he is as green as the jobs Obama want to create. This is strictly an opinion. I have no clue as to the inner working of baseball operations for the RS, but if Lucchino is running the show why not just hold the title of GM/President, and continue to employ BC as assistant until he gets a few more years under his belt.
    Posted by Alibiike[/QUOTE]

    you again have said the same thing i came to and also posted re the whole scenario and even the conclusion (ll should have just kept both titles since he is fctng as both). however my top preference would have been to bring in one of the top gms in the game (but ownership and ll want it all "in their pocket" so that was not gonna happen.

    i like ll's biz sense in general (though i know they had a reason to, but i would not have let theo go without getting something good in return (chicago had to have theo)

    i just wish they were willing to spend a few dollars more (ie that decision is with the ownership).
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from brdbreu. Show brdbreu's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    In Response to Re: Valentine or Lamont?:
    [QUOTE]We've had 9 years of top notch talent which in which the Sox should have qualified as a dynasty. They should have been in at least 2 more WS and possibly 3 more. They have underperformed with a manager who wasn't a great tactition and who didn't have an idea about baseball strategy. I, for one, can only imagine what heights the Sox would have achieved with a capable manager like Bobby V. The bottom line is winning and V will make every effort to win every game. I don't think he'll put less importance on early season games. With him I think it will be, a win is a win, no matter when it happens. We all know that Francona believed the crunch time games were more important than the early season games and he tried to have the team ready for the September crunch time. ??????? I want a manager that makes the current game the most important game, even if it's the first game of the season. I don't want a manager that plans, in February, when he'll rest players during the season. From what I read, Bobby V. is considered one of the best tactitions and strategists in the game. Stop the nonsense and hire a real manager...Bobby V.
    Posted by BOSOX1941[/QUOTE]

    imagine i we had a manager like maddon. we passed on him. too savvy to be the  softy for the pres/ownership
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from davidap. Show davidap's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    Pick Valentine. He'll deflect attention away from the players. He'll be savvy with public relations and the Boston media (half the battle of the modern day manager). He'll demand peak preparation and performance from his players. He'll be open to statistical analysis (or so he says). He'll command instant respect and credibility from everyone. I don't care if his act wears thin after 2-3 years. He'd be coming here to win now. The Red Sox already have enough talent to compete for a championship and this would by far be Valentine's best roster.

    Do not discount Valentine's excellent international reputation with Asian players. Maybe he'd get something out of Matsuzaka. His mere presence would attract Asian free agents. The Red Sox could probably find another Okajima or two for short money to be effective out of the bullpen. While Asian starting pitchers and positional players (Ichiro notwithstanding) have been underwhelming, plenty of Asian relief pitchers tend to excel for 2-5 years when first coming over to the majors. Valentine would make Boston the No. 1 destination for Asian talent. He'd quickly repair any damage caused by the curious treatment of Okajima in 2011.

    Hire Valentine for manager. Pair him up with a bright trainee as bench coach who can replace him after the inevitable clubhouse rebellion in three years. If Valentine wants his own guy in place, that's fine too, as long as Cherington at least gets to name one of the coaches to the staff as a future managerial candidate.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    Count me as officially on the Bobby V bandwagon after reading this article. Maybe LL really is the smartest guy in the room.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BOSOX1941. Show BOSOX1941's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    In Response to Re: Valentine or Lamont?:
    [QUOTE]I am ready for Bobby V., and BOSOX1941 none here will forget what you say today just in case you ever turn on him  
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]
    It will be hard to turn on Bobby V. Unless he quits on winnable games or rests players that don't want to rest or constantly leaves starting pitchers in a game until they give up the required 6-7 runs early or removes a starter who has retired 10 batters in a row, the last 3 by strike outs, because he has thrown 100 pitches or he rests a batter that has been 12 for 20 in his last 5 games. We don't have to worry about Bobby V knowing how to create a much needed run late in a game. BOBBY ALREADY KNOWS THAT BUNTING ISN'T AGAINST THE RULES !!!
    I also believe he will require his starting pitchers to be ready to go 9 innings, not 6 !! 
    But feel free to quote me any time during the season.
    All I knew about Francona when they hired him was that the Philly fans wanted to tar and feather him........It didn't take long for me to understand why.
    BurritoT, I know you've suggested that it's time to take the foot off Francona's neck, and I told you I wasn't yet ready to forget his ineptness. I suffered through 8 years of his nonsense, I owe him more than a few weeks of continued disrespect.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from BOSOX1941. Show BOSOX1941's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    In Response to Re: Valentine or Lamont?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Valentine or Lamont? : Does this mean that Bosox1941 is taking a year off from the forum? The only reason that he ever participated in the forum in the past was to rant on about Francona. Is he capable of widening his talking points? I will be anxiously awaiting what he will talk about. Will the USB Parrot be placed into mothballs and into the attic?
    Posted by UticaClub[/QUOTE]
    I'm looking forward to see the team play to it's potential without the hinderance of "winning in spite of their manager" or "losing because of him"..
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheExaminer. Show TheExaminer'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]

    George and Billy were kind of a disaster too, but won a lot of gams together. You never know.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    Go ahead and vote in a national (international?) poll:

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/11/poll-who-will-be-the-next-red-sox-manager.html
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from drpjn. Show drpjn's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    I also initially shuddered at the though of Valentine taking over.  Much baggage, a volatile managerial style, increased potential for conflict with the FO and then,

    I realized that Larry is now in charge, so

    Put these two buddies together, sit back, relax, and enjoy.  It will either work bigtime or blow up bigtime.  Plus, it will keep Dan S busy at the keyboard!

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from CONIGfan25. Show CONIGfan25's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    I'd like a Bobby Valentine disguise for Christmas.

    It's gotta be Bobby V!
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    In Response to Re: Valentine or Lamont?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Valentine or Lamont? : George and Billy were kind of a disaster too, but won a lot of gams together. You never know.
    Posted by TheExaminer[/QUOTE]

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from read-socks. Show read-socks's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    It does not matter that much.  It is only for a year or two until John Farrell is set free from the Blue Jays.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from WesternOregon. Show WesternOregon's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    I have no expectations.I have no opinion. I have nothing to contribute regarding each man's skills as a potential manager.

    Only the end matters.

    Only the end can justify this selection.

    Next year at this time ask me.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

      Occam's razor says it's Lamont. The Sox need a caretaker manager, as the computer put's together the roster, there are few managerial decisions to make,
    as long as the guy turns in the line-up card he's met his biggest responsibility.
     Bobby V brings too much drama per pound, so no thanks.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

    Re: Valentine or Lamont?

    In Response to Re: Valentine or Lamont?:
    [QUOTE]  Occam's razor says it's Lamont. The Sox need a caretaker manager, as the computer put's together the roster, there are few managerial decisions to make, as long as the guy turns in the line-up card he's met his biggest responsibility.  Bobby V brings too much drama per pound, so no thanks.
    Posted by YOUKILLUS20[/QUOTE]

    When you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better."
     

Share