OrangeWhoopass.com Forums

General Discussion => Talk Zone => Topic started by: Houston on February 25, 2008, 02:46:13 pm

Title: Looks like Juan-Gone was a second choice
Post by: Houston on February 25, 2008, 02:46:13 pm
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/stories.nsf/cardinals/story/38E0D55F13C08EF8862573FA0017B7B6?OpenDocument
Title: Re: Looks like Juan-Gone was a second choice
Post by: Gizzmonic on February 25, 2008, 03:19:30 pm
How does La Russa keep his job? 

I know they won the WS 2 years ago but considering the new GM, his spat with Rolen, his stated willingness to play Pujols every day despite a serious injury, driving drunk after a member of the team died driving drunk, he's got to be living on borrowed time.

Title: Re: Looks like Juan-Gone was a second choice
Post by: Mr. Happy on February 25, 2008, 03:28:40 pm
Quote from: Gizzmonic on February 25, 2008, 03:19:30 pm
How does La Russa keep his job? 


By having one of the best records as a manager???
Title: Re: Looks like Juan-Gone was a second choice
Post by: JimR on February 25, 2008, 03:33:29 pm
Quote from: Gizzmonic on February 25, 2008, 03:19:30 pm
How does La Russa keep his job? 

I know they won the WS 2 years ago but considering the new GM, his spat with Rolen, his stated willingness to play Pujols every day despite a serious injury, driving drunk after a member of the team died driving drunk, he's got to be living on borrowed time.

i'm no Tony fan, but isn't Pujols the one who is insisting to play? Was LaRussa's after the pitcher's death or before?
Title: Re: Looks like Juan-Gone was a second choice
Post by: MusicMan on February 25, 2008, 03:37:15 pm
Quote from: JimR on February 25, 2008, 03:33:29 pm
i'm no Tony fan, but isn't Pujols the one who is insisting to play? Was LaRussa's after the pitcher's death or before?

Before.  LaRussa was March 2007, Hancock was April 2007.
Title: Re: Looks like Juan-Gone was a second choice
Post by: Gizzmonic on February 25, 2008, 03:53:29 pm
Quote from: MusicMan on February 25, 2008, 03:37:15 pm
Before.  LaRussa was March 2007, Hancock was April 2007.

I stand corrected.

For some reason, I thought it was right after Hancock died.

I'm still puzzled as to why La Russa needs to say publicly that he was interested in Bonds.  The quote by the Cardinals new GM makes it sound like he's irritated at La Russa for divulging this information.
Title: Re: Looks like Juan-Gone was a second choice
Post by: Col. Sphinx Drummond on February 25, 2008, 03:53:38 pm
Quote from: JimR on February 25, 2008, 03:33:29 pm
Was LaRussa's after the pitcher's death or before?

Sadly, LaRussa set an example that Hancock died trying to live up to.
Title: Re: Looks like Juan-Gone was a second choice
Post by: Astroholic on February 25, 2008, 04:09:19 pm
Quote from: Sphinx Drummond on February 25, 2008, 03:53:38 pm
Sadly, LaRussa set an example that Hancock died trying to live up to.

I am no LaRussa fan, but that death was not a Tony's fault and I don't think it fair to blame him in any way.
Title: Re: Looks like Juan-Gone was a second choice
Post by: Limey on February 25, 2008, 04:23:28 pm
Quote from: Astroholic on February 25, 2008, 04:09:19 pm
I am no LaRussa fan, but that death was not a Tony's fault and I don't think it fair to blame him in any way.

Obviously there's no direct link.  But I can see that the manager drinking and driving is not setting a good example for his players.  I think it is fair to assume that he would've been fired had the two events happened in the reverse order.
Title: Re: Looks like Juan-Gone was a second choice
Post by: Astroholic on February 25, 2008, 04:24:36 pm
Quote from: Limey on February 25, 2008, 04:23:28 pm
Obviously there's no direct link.  But I can see that the manager drinking and driving is not setting a good example for his players.  I think it is fair to assume that he would've been fired had the two events happened in the reverse order.

That I can agree with.