BBTF's Sox Therapy Discussion :: Torre in All of His Glory

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

1. Phil Coorey. Posted: April 29, 2007 at 02:04 AM (#2348853)

I have not seen the game yet and was glad to watch the World Cup final instead, it seems.

I'll be over the moon if they win tomorrow with Mut Tavarez on the mound.

2. 1k5v3L

Posted: April 29, 2007 at 02:46 AM (#2348908)

Sour grapes.

3. J. Lowenstein Apathy Club Posted: April 29, 2007 at 03:14 AM (#2348958)

I have not seen the game yet and was glad to watch the World Cup final instead, it seems.

Congrats, Phil. Your boys were unstoppable.

4. Miko Supports Shane's Spam Habit Posted: April 29, 2007 at 03:44 AM (#2348977)

Sour grapes.

? I don't think that expression applies.

5. Chip Posted: April 29, 2007 at 04:22 AM (#2349003)

Actually, Torre was secretly planning to bring in Igawa in the first regardless. The injury was just a bonus excuse. He knew that the Sox suck against mediocre lefties they've never seen before (and even a few they have seen), and guessed that the unknown bad lefty mojo would be that much stronger if Boston didn't even have time to study video of the guy.

6. Golfing Great Mitch Cumstein Posted: April 29, 2007 at 04:58 AM (#2349020)

Phil,
Can you explain the ending? I have a little bit of knowledge of how cricket is played and this situation boggles my mind. I thought international cricket matches were untimed and played for a certain amount of overs. Matches would be played over a couple of days if needed. Why was this match shortened because of the weather and time of day? And what was the confusion about the last three overs?

7. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: April 29, 2007 at 10:12 AM (#2349029)

It's a random lefty. I wouldn't expect Igawa to start being a world-beater.

8. Darren

Posted: April 29, 2007 at 08:58 PM (#2349561)

Is this it for St. Joe?

9. JB H Posted: April 29, 2007 at 09:36 PM (#2349585)

big win today. i mentally write off any tavarez start as a loss unless its like a home game vs seattle or something. stealing this win is sweet. god do we need clemens.

okajima now has a 17/3 K/BB ratio. i have no idea what to think of him. his track record is not very good but he's been sick this year. i'm pretty sure PECOTA had his ERA north of five, can anyone confirm? the sox are way overdue to randomly get a great relief season out of nowhere.

10. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: April 29, 2007 at 09:57 PM (#2349594)

Joe Torre is a damn good manager. You NEVER hear a player having a problem with him. The players with clean images seem to love him, and the asshats that end up on Torre's teams never seem to hav e any problems either.

And I think he's Ok tactically as well. I rarely hav ea problem with a Torre move, while everytime Francona picks up a phone I start to worry.

11. Darren

Posted: April 29, 2007 at 10:01 PM (#2349597)

You NEVER hear a player having a problem with him.

That's a bit strong. Kenny Rogers had a problem with him, as did Jeff Weaver IIRC. There were others too.

Tactically, I disagree with you. Torre's reputation as a good tactician is mainly derived from handing the ball off to a closer who was nearly perfect for many years.

12. Rough Carrigan

Posted: April 29, 2007 at 10:21 PM (#2349605)

Torre was a brilliant manager when his pitching staff had rotations including Cone, Wells and Pettitte, or Cone, Pettitte and Clemens in the rotation and Nelson, Stanton and Mendoza setting up Rivera or all 4 of them setting up Wetteland. Man, he was smart then!

Strangely, he doesn't seem as brilliant now, nor did he when he was managing the Cardinals.

13. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: April 29, 2007 at 10:34 PM (#2349617)

Tactically, I disagree with you. Torre's reputation as a good tactician is mainly derived from handing the ball off to a closer who was nearly perfect for many years.

He certainly didn't have a good rep as a strategist with the Mets, but he wasn't going to do much with them regardless of what he did anyway.

14. Christopher Linden Posted: April 29, 2007 at 10:39 PM (#2349624)

Torre's reputation as a good tactician is mainly derived from handing the ball off to a closer who was nearly perfect for many years.

No argument there, but I think judging real-world managers on in-game tactics is something of a lost cause, if only because so very few seem to be really good at it. Given equal rosters, are there more than four or five real-life field bosses who would win a good Strat league? Torre does do a good job of staying out of the way, keeping Steinbrenner out of the way, and for ten years has shown a better-than-most understanding of the urgency of postseason baseball.

There are 30 men managing major-league teams today. I'd rather have Torre than at least two thirds of them, and that includes His Tonyness in St. Louis.

Happy Base Ball

15. Darren

Posted: April 29, 2007 at 11:19 PM (#2349653)

I always thought the "providing a good atmosphere" bit was overdone, but I have to admit that it's probably attributable to Torre that the Yankees keep getting good players to sign on the cheap. They seem to really like playing for him.

16. Phil Coorey. Posted: April 29, 2007 at 11:31 PM (#2349661)

Can you explain the ending? I have a little bit of knowledge of how cricket is played and this situation boggles my mind. I thought international cricket matches were untimed and played for a certain amount of overs. Matches would be played over a couple of days if needed. Why was this match shortened because of the weather and time of day? And what was the confusion about the last three overs?

Fiasco is a mild word to describe it.

One day cricket is only 50 overs per side, but the game was shortened to about 38 because of a 3 hour rain delay.

With three overs to remain, Australia had the game in the bag as Sri Lanka needed about 70 runs to win. When they went off the field the game in effect was over because any recalculation would make Australia the winner. The confusion set in because the world cup has a reserve day not like other one day games.

I'll quickly check an aussie newspaper and get a better explanation, as I am rushing this post...

Congrats, Phil. Your boys were unstoppable.

Thanks. To think in Friday's chatter that I was calling Gilly and automatic out!!!

17. Phil Coorey. Posted: April 29, 2007 at 11:34 PM (#2349663)

This article is perfect...

I'm to blame, Crowe says....

Btw, that guy is Russell Crowe's cousin...

18. PJ Martinez Posted: April 30, 2007 at 03:26 AM (#2349754)

An idle thought: looking over the early schedule, and noting the health of the team going into the season, it was clear that the Sox needed to take advantage of April. Well, mission accomplished. But it seems worth reminding oneself as a Sox fan that this looked like a month in which it was practically required and to some extent expected that the Sox have a good record. Hopefully the lead that they have built sustains them for the more difficult stretches-- in terms of both schedule and health-- that are certainly imminent.

19. Darren

Posted: April 30, 2007 at 03:40 AM (#2349758)

I'm not sure why the Sox needed to take advantage of April. They played 14/24 games on the road, 5 against Toronto, and 6 against the Yankees, and 3 against AL west favorite LAA.

Meanwhile, the Yanks played 3 less road games, and have had 6 against Boston, 3 against Cleveland, 3 against Minnesota, and 1 against the Jays.

I don't see how you'd look at that schedule and conclude that Boston needed to fatten up before the tough part fo the schedule. Am I missing your point?

20. Dr. Vaux Posted: April 30, 2007 at 03:47 AM (#2349760)

Hmmm. . . This month they played the Yankees 6 times and the Blue Jays 5 times. They also had 3 in Texas and 2 against the Angels (3 scheduled). Next month looks a bit harder, but April wasn't exactly easy. Surely there are stretches coming where they play mostly the Orioles, Devil Rays, Tigers, Mariners, and those sorts of teams.

21. Darren

Posted: April 30, 2007 at 03:57 AM (#2349763)

Vaux,

They played all 3 games against LAA and swept them (rainout was against the cursed Mariners).

22. Dr. Vaux Posted: April 30, 2007 at 04:03 AM (#2349764)

They did? I guess I read the Yahoo schedule wrong. Anyhow, as you could probably tell, my post was a less well-formed response to PJM's than yours was, rather than a response to yours.

23. Dr. Vaux Posted: April 30, 2007 at 04:04 AM (#2349765)

Ah, here we go. They played three against the Angels, but there were four scheduled.

24. Phil Coorey. Posted: April 30, 2007 at 04:05 AM (#2349766)

How about Manny guys?

Opposite field dinger and a better hit ball in my opinion that was caught by Abreu at the wall.

If Manny gets going, we'll only be better.

25. PJ Martinez Posted: April 30, 2007 at 05:00 AM (#2349786)

Hmmm... Maybe my feelings about April were misguided. I guess it had as much to do with health as anything-- both the health of the Sox and the lack thereof in the Bronx.

Still, I think the Yankees may have had the tougher schedule, with Cleveland and Minnesota. Not to mention six against the Red Sox! That Boston squad is tough.

26. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: April 30, 2007 at 10:19 AM (#2349828)

That's a bit strong. Kenny Rogers had a problem with him, as did Jeff Weaver IIRC. There were others too.

This is because Kenny Rogers is an asshat.

27. villageidiom Posted: April 30, 2007 at 12:03 PM (#2349840)

(Torre) for ten years has shown a better-than-most understanding of the urgency of postseason baseball.

For the more successful years, he had Don Zimmer by his side. His tactical skills were correlated with The Gerbil's presence in the dugout.

Not that I want to spend too much time defending Zimmer. His stint in Boston as a manager he had misfocused priorities; but he has the skills to be one heck of an advisor.

28. villageidiom Posted: May 01, 2007 at 03:34 AM (#2350669)

Don't know where to put this, but I don't think it warrants its own thread.

Yankees fan trained terrorists

As far as I'm concerned, Sox fans can throw all the pizza they want.

29. Eric M. Van Posted: May 01, 2007 at 10:17 AM (#2350804)

Zimmer had a somewhat slow hook as a manager but was, indeed, otherwise an excellent tactician. And folks may know that I despise the guy, so there's no bias here.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Reader Comments and Retorts

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

Bookmarks

Hot Topics

Syndicate