UMFan83

That's fair. Like I said originally I haven't really thought much about who a "premier manager" really is, it was just a term I threw out there and then quickly listed 4-5 names that seemed right to me. I know I used the "francona his missed the playoffs in 3 of his 8 years" line but its almost silly to hold 89 win non-playoff seasons against these guys when they play in a division with 2 other great teams. Someone is going to be the odd man out, and that year it was the Yankees, just like it was the Red Sox the last 2 years and the Rays in 2009. Torre won 87 games in 2000 and was on pace for 89 wins in 1995, both years he made the playoffs and in 2000 won the World Series, so its not like he never led the team to a sub-90 win regular season.

Jeez I dunno. Not him though. I guess Girardi, Bochy, LaRussa, Scioscia, Maddon He just doesn't seem like one of those guys that you have to go after if he's available, so if I see that Tito and Theo are having a disconnect, I don't eliminate Theo from who to go after, I eliminate Francona. How the hell is Girardi premier but not Francona? Dunno, never had a losing season as manager? He's been a manager for 5 seasons, 4 of them with the New York [expletive] Yankees. His 1 seasons with Florida was below .500 and his 1st season with the Yankees was the only time in 15 freaking years that the Yankees didn't make the playoffs. Girardi has never failed in a manager position (small sample size of course). He won MOY (rightly or wrongly) in his first year as manager and only season in Florida (didnt realize it was under .500), and won a WS in his 2nd year as a Yankees manager. Francona had a disapointing 4 year run in Philly and was fired only to be picked up by the Red Sox after they hastily made Grady Little the scapegoat for their playoff choking (has nothing to do with anything I know, just wanted to add that). He's had a great run in Boston during a period where the Sox payroll has gone up nearly $80 million. He did of course lead the team to 2 WS in his 1st and 4th years as manager, but also missed the playoffs in nearly half the years he's been there (3 out of 8) despite a top 3 payroll every year and presided over two pretty alarming late season collapses in 2006 and 2011.

Jeez I dunno. Not him though. I guess Girardi, Bochy, LaRussa, Scioscia, Maddon He just doesn't seem like one of those guys that you have to go after if he's available, so if I see that Tito and Theo are having a disconnect, I don't eliminate Theo from who to go after, I eliminate Francona. How the hell is Girardi premier but not Francona? Dunno, never had a losing season as manager? BTW, his Phillies teams ranked 11th, 11th, 5th, 14th in the NL in OBP when he was the manager. I remember reading when he took over as Boston manager that in Philly he didn't put much emphasis on patience and walking, so that's been in my head for the last 8 years. Obviously he adapted quite well due to the organizational philosophy and the players given to him though. I guess I just kind have saw him as Theo's Art Howe and its skewed my impression of him since then. Admittedly he did a very good job in Boston and I wouldn't have a problem being our manager. But if we had to choose between Theo as GM and Tito as manager, I'd choose Theo, and that's what prompted my original comment.

There is no such thing as a premier manager. I like that his teams are incredibly patient and regularly lead or among the leaders in walks taken. Granted, that is a Boston philosophy, but he's been a part of it. He's managed 10 playoff series and won 7 of them. I think he will be a calm and rational voice in the clubhouse and not the net negative that Quade and Baker were, or an indifferent goof like Piniella became. Yeah I have no problem with what he's done in Boston and I wouldnt be upset if he was our manager. The reason for my original message was responding to whoever implied that if Francona and Epstein couldnt work together they'd hire Tito and Friedman instead. I'd rather hire Theo and another manager instead.

Jeez I dunno. Not him though. I guess Girardi, Bochy, LaRussa, Scioscia, Maddon He just doesn't seem like one of those guys that you have to go after if he's available, so if I see that Tito and Theo are having a disconnect, I don't eliminate Theo from who to go after, I eliminate Francona.

Why do we want Francona again? He doesn't seem like anything special to me. I know he led the Sox to 2 titles but...I don't know he just doesn't seem like a premier manager to me.

The general Bears fan is probably down about the last 2 games and with all the drama in the Wild Card races mid week it makes sense that the attention would be away from the Bears.

The options other than Aramis seem really depressing considering he was one of the top 3-4 3rd basemen in baseball this year. What's Steve Buechele doing?

Can Paul McCartney play 1B?

I am using the Cubs pathetic past to show how the "Golden age" of Cubs baseball has been pathetic relative to what Theo has done with the Red Sox, and if you as a Cubs fan are going to dismiss Theo because he only won 89 and 90 games the last 2 years, that's really illogical.

Phils in 5 Brewers in 4 Tigers in 5 Rays in 3 Phils in 6 Rays in 7 Phils in 6

Again I want the best GM out there because I want results. I want someone who can build an organization where I know will be contending year in and year out. 90 89 95 95 96 86 95 98 95 Cubs fans would do back flips if they could win that consistently. 90 wins is something that the Cubs have achieved in just one 162 game season since 1989. Once in 22 years. And here Theo's Sox have done it 7 times in the last 9 years. Hey, if we get to the point where we are winning 89-90 games and not making the playoffs, and that's not good enough for us, I am ok with doing something else. But lets get there first. The Cubs have not had a consistently decent team since the 1940's. Theo has proven the ability to create a consistently good team in a large market. What's not to like about that?

It's a fair point but in those 2 seasons he won 89 and 90 games, win totals that the Cubs have only reached twice in the last 13 years (2004 and 2008), and 3 times in the last 22 years. Then you consider the fact that he'd be building a team in a much easier league and division, and the fact that he built 2 World Series champions, and it becomes a moot point.

As bad as the Cubs have been, the Red Sox have only made one more playoff appearance than them over the last 6 years. And since 2007, they are tied in playoff wins (0).

With the Cubs, Theo would likely be playing with a slightly smaller payroll that makes it more difficult to withstand bad contracts like JD Drew, John Lackey, Julio Lugo, Carl Crawford and Matt Clement. In fact how are those contracts any different than signing (or resigning) players like Carlos Zambrano, Alfonso Soriano, John Grabow, Milton Bradley. Both GMs signed players to large contracts and did not get their value back from them. That said, I am certainly not saying that Theo = Hendry. When it comes to player development, Theo destroys Hendry. And obviously, Theo uses relevent statistics to evaluate players and that makes all the difference in signing and not signing a player like Soriano. As bad as some of those bad contracts that I listed above are, Theo has guided a team in the toughest division in the toughest league to 86+ wins every year. He clearly puts his team in a position where the team can still compete even if he makes a bad signing or two.

Yup. Get all the involved parties together and lets replay the rest of that season from that point (2 outs, top 8, 3-0 Cubs, Pierre on 2nd).

I wish Nate Silver could figure out the odds, given the scenarios entering the last day of the season, that we would be deprived of no tiebreaker games the last 2 seasons. IIRC, there were 3 teams with a chance to win the NL Wild Card last year, and given the 8 scenarios possible, a 75% chance of seeing a tiebreaker game.

Theriot will bat .600, win World Series MVP and get signed to a three-year extension. Only to have the contract voided when he tests positive for pixie dust.

I'm probably biased but if I were Philly I'd be dying to play STL and therefore be trying to win this game. Their offense is real weak outside Albert and their pitching isn't good enough to make up for it. Arizona's got a scarier top of the rotation. I saw this and was confused. Outside of Pujols the Cardinals have two .900 OPS hitters, two .800 OPS hitters and two hitters in the .775 range. and Ryan Theriot It appears that he's become a bench player. You can't quiet the Riot

I'm probably biased but if I were Philly I'd be dying to play STL and therefore be trying to win this game. Their offense is real weak outside Albert and their pitching isn't good enough to make up for it. Arizona's got a scarier top of the rotation. I saw this and was confused. Outside of Pujols the Cardinals have two .900 OPS hitters, two .800 OPS hitters and two hitters in the .775 range. and Ryan Theriot

*waits for SSR to point out that Rose carried*

If I could show you a minute by minute reaction to last night's events by Bill Simmons, would that be something you'd be interested in? Oh, ok here you go: http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7033950/a-running-diary-game-162

Only if Holliday takes one off the nuts again. TBH, the Cardinals could win the series. I won't pick them but they have the middle of the order that can get to the Phils pitching hypothetically.

LMAO During the rain delay, Dan Shaugnesy (sp) went on NESN and said (paraphrasing): "I think the Rays are not going to win tonight. I think the one thing that we have learned already tonight is that the Red Sox season is not going to end tonight. They live to play another day." This of course is when the Yankees were up 7-0 and the Sox were up 3-2

John Heyman says that the Red Sox collapse is the worst in baseball history, and the Braves collapse is the 4th I think.