Wasn't Herzog's forte the all-speed, no pop pitching and defense model of baseball team?

Does anyone besides Rick Hummel (who may have cold-called Whitey) or Whitey (who could have cold-called Hummel) think this is a good fit?

I would love to see Whitey managing again. More than anything, he preached building a team to suit the home stadium, which is why he focused on speed and defense in the cavernous Busch Stadium of the '80s. I imagine he'd take a different approach in Fenway. When he was in StL he had significant say in personnel (he was GM and Manager for a stretch) and he would not get that in Boston. I assume he knows that. And, Whitey was the master of the "bullpen by committee" in '85.

I'd say the chances of him managing the Red Sox are slim and none. But, I would love to see it happen.

David Pinto over at Baseball Musings touched on this yesterday.

Hey, the Rathskeller is gone! It's been torn down as part of a new construction project on the south side of Kenmore Square.

I'm not saying he could do it again, but I wouldn't write him off because of how his previous teams were constructed.

I'm not necessarily writing him off, but being out of the game for more than 10 years, Whitey has missed a lot of changes, I would question how he would adjust.

Weren't Herzog's teams very impatient hitters?

No. In his Cardinal days the Cardinals were generally in the top half of the league in walks. Even when the team's OBP was .309 (1986?, 1988?), the Cardinals were in the top half in walks. They hit .236 that year.

How old is Earl Weaver. I think he would be the perfect fit.

Folks, there's no story. The much beloved former manager of the St Louis baseball team is being asked by the leading newspaper in St Louis if he'd take a hypothetical job offer by a team halfway around the nation. It's a filler story in the paper. Saturday's Rams pre-game, Sunday gametime, Monday post-game review, & the baseball season's over. The hook is that two years ago he was asked to be bench coach, but that was before the current management (Kid Theo & Co) was in charge. This is just a bored reporter taking water cooler daydreams & turning it into an article.

Earl is 73. But he sure seems older than McKeon and Zim. I don't think he has any interest in coming back.

He thinks the World Series should be played in a neutral, warm-weather city. It takes effort to think of a worse idea relating to the Series.

Why not? It's miserable for fans and nearly impossible for players to perform their best under crummy, late October weather conditions in northern markets. I had much more fun at the games in Florida this year than in N.Y. (although it was perfectly comfortable in Game 6.)

The name never mentioned in the media, but which seems to be on the lips of many Bosox fans is Larry Dierker.

Now, I've heard tell he alienated the media and his stars. How he pissed off the media I know. What specifically did he do to piss off Biggio, Bagwell, et al.?

I want Jim Leyland!!!! I want Jim Leyland!!!!

Chris J, it's not all about a St. Louis paper talking to a former St. Louis manager (although I'd still be surprised if it happened). Here's a Globe article http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2003/10/28/search_for_the_new_man_could_take_a_while/ and here's a snippet from same:

The net the Sox will cast in search of a new man will be wide enough to include Jim Fregosi, who almost certainly will be interviewed, and perhaps even 71-year-old Whitey Herzog, who might have special appeal to Henry because of Henry's love for the Cardinals, which goes back to his childhood. It's not inconceivable, one of the team sources said, that the Sox would look at Herzog as a short-term solution, a la 72-year-old Jack McKeon, manager of the Florida Marlins, and hire his eventual successor as bench coach.

At this stage, they're not ruling out anything -- other than Little.

"Trader Jack made my [expletive] name famous again," Herzog said yesterday with a laugh. "I'm younger than he is."

Herzog twice has been approached to manage the Red Sox and turned down the job both times. The last time was in 1996, before Jimy Williams was hired, when Dan Duquette wouldn't give him enough say in choosing his coaching staff. More recently, he was offered the job as bench coach under Joe Kerrigan, who was replaced by Little in spring training 2002.

I'm sure it would break Earl's heart if Theo and Larry didn't call. He'd have to spend a whole day crying on his HOF plaque to get over it, then get back to the golf course.

Thanks Tommy Boy. My vote remains for Dierker.

If that's true Cito, then how'd you know to show up for your two interviews with the White Sox? Did Reinsdorf IM you?

Ok so Earl Weaver is not happening but what about Weaver disciple ... .Davey Johnson? Basically he never had a bad year with what 4 teams? He is all about OBP and Power, and he ran a 70's style pen with the mets (McDowell, Orosco, etc)

I like the Dierker option, and strongly second Davey Johnson. James was a big fan of Johnson, right?

---Kurt

Wow, a Chuck Tanner, and Von Hayes reference in the same thread. This thing is solid gold!

Maybe I am being too hard on the article, but I tend to divide these sorts of "Who will be hired to manage" stories into two categories: 1) Stories based on inside info from the front office making the hire 2) Others. Usually others are just fan favorites, or media favorites or both or just odd ball picks. I remember a lot of talk of Carlton Fisk being asked to run the Sox in the '97/8 off-season. None of that talk came from the Sox, who hired Manuel. Anytime I see a story coming from category 2, I immediately think of the Fisk rumors.

<i>Posted 1:42 p.m., October 28, 2003 (#63) - You suck, DTS

brendan, who did you play with?

I saw Count Viglione play at the Rat many, many years ago. It might have been the funniest show that I've ever seen. The crowd was sparse and he tried to get people into it by hanging from the exposed pipes while singing. Rat staff kept telling him to stop, pulling on his legs as he dangled in front of the crowd.

Stymied, he began ranting about Lou Reed but none of it really made any sense. The audience just stared back, so silent that you could hear roaches scuttling. He must've really been grasping for a way to get the audience on his side at this point. After a long silence he finally yelled "Do you know who Lou Reed is?" No reply was immediately forthcoming, so I yelled back, "No!"

He stopped and stared for another five seconds, and then finally replied, "He's the Minister of Marijuana, that's who Lou Reed is!"

At this we burst out laughing, picked up our beers and headed upstairs. It really wasn't the Count's night.

Just a reminder for all you historians out there.. Whitey Herzog also managed headcases like Joaquin Andujar too.

Whitey would be an interesting fit, but only as a last choice (if everybody else doesn't want the job)

Bud Black's managerial credope...

There's a combination of everything that goes into player evaluation and teaching and leading," said Black. "Statistical info is important, so is breaking down video. All these factors weigh in and also what you see. Over a long season, players might not be swinging the bat well. They might be swinging it extremely well at other times. Different factors go into making decisions, they all have a place in the game. Whether it's the eye, stats or another ingredient, you have to use them all.

I've never had a problem with Safari as my primary browser, here or elsewhere. It seems substantially faster than the other choices, too.

First of all, Whitey's successfull teams usually had a John Mayberry or Jack Clark. He could always find a place for a guy to flat hit.

While the image of his teams were slap and scoot, you'll find that his successful teams (at least in St. Louis -- haven't checked the Royals, but I'm pretty sure it applies here too) were excellent OBP teams and his relatively poor teams weren't.

The other thing that's worth noting is that while they may have been crafted for the parks they played in, they were equally successful in the big power parks.

As Bill James pointed out decades ago, we have images of the type of teams likely to be succesful in a particular park, but the images don't seem to translate into reality all that well.

Good teams tend to have a smaller than average home field advantage in any case.