Ozzie extended

by Air Raid Siren Stan on Sep 11, 2007 7:05 PM CDT Comment 27 comments

Guillen signs four-year extension
09/11/2007 5:55 PM ET
By Alex Gyr / MLB.com

CHICAGO -- The White Sox may have the worst record in baseball, but that has not stopped the team's management from making a major commitment to the face of the franchise, manager Ozzie Guillen.

General manager Ken Williams announced that the club has signed Guillen to a four-year contract extension that will take the Sox skipper through the 2012 season.

Guillen's contract was set to end following the 2008 campaign with an option for 2009.

Guillen, 43, has been one of the most controversial managers in the Major Leagues throughout his first four seasons at the helm. He has made news on a number of occasions for emotional outbursts and his openness to say nearly everything that is on his mind.

SouthSideSox is a community driven site. As such, users are able to express their thoughts and opinions in a FanPost, such as this one, which represents the views of this particular fan, but not necessarily the entire community or SouthSideSox editors.

0 recs | Comment 27 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

why the rush?

why not next september?

by The Wizard on Sep 11, 2007 7:10 PM CDT reply actions

lame duck situations

are not good for an organization. whether this was the right move, i don't know. but if you're going to make this move, you do it now.

Burn it down.

by larry on Sep 11, 2007 7:11 PM CDT up reply actions

will any player give a damn if ozzie

has a contract next year or not?

by The Wizard on Sep 11, 2007 7:16 PM CDT up reply actions

yes

do you sign a long-term contract with a company if you think your boss won't be there for the life, or a large portion, of that contract? it's certainly a big consideration for free agents.

Burn it down.

by larry on Sep 11, 2007 7:21 PM CDT up reply actions

it's a small factor

there are a LOT more variables that I consider first

boss may leave, be fired, pass away etc.
you don't pay much attention on something volatile like that

by The Wizard on Sep 11, 2007 7:48 PM CDT up reply actions

you aren't signing a long term contract

a presumption on my part but there aren't many people out there who aren't at-will employees; certainly, most people are not signing contracts for anything longer than a year. you can walk whenever you want. a guy with a 4 year contract can't.

Burn it down.

by larry on Sep 11, 2007 7:53 PM CDT up reply actions

a guy with a 4-year contract can't leave?

is this what are you saying?

by The Wizard on Sep 11, 2007 8:17 PM CDT up reply actions

not of his own volition he can't

a player also isn't going to want to sign for a team that looks like it's in flux.

Burn it down.

by larry on Sep 11, 2007 8:22 PM CDT up reply actions

Well, what about one set in concrete

with long-term contracts that are inflexible? I'd not want to sign on to that, either.

.400 or bust

by winningugly on Sep 11, 2007 8:23 PM CDT up reply actions

Pass away?

Do you hire an actuary before acepting a position? Most folks don't take a job based upon the boss unless the boss recruited him/her. And most folks don't get fird if the boss resigns/gets fired/dies. Self interest, you know.

.400 or bust

by winningugly on Sep 11, 2007 8:17 PM CDT up reply actions

re

Most folks don't take a job based upon the boss unless the boss recruited him/her. And most folks don't get fird if the boss resigns/gets fired/dies.

that what I'm trying to say...

by The Wizard on Sep 11, 2007 8:25 PM CDT up reply actions

i'm not sure you can draw a perfect analogy

to other jobs.

when i was being recruited by colleges, the #1 athletic factor (and second overall to only the academic quality of the school) was the coach. i didn't meet very many athletes who thought differently. this is the person you play for, the person who barks orders at you, the person who sets the tone for the team. you better be at least be okay with who that is or you will be miserable.

Burn it down.

by larry on Sep 11, 2007 8:30 PM CDT up reply actions

this isn't a college

I agree in a college, the coach is a big factor

I don't think so here in the pros

anyway I didn't mean to start an argument

by The Wizard on Sep 11, 2007 8:38 PM CDT up reply actions

totally, totally disagree

how many times do we hear about players hating their manager and being happy when a manager gets fired? yeah, it's not as big a factor as in college. but it's a mistake to think who your boss is doesn't factor in a player's mind.

Burn it down.

by larry on Sep 11, 2007 8:42 PM CDT up reply actions

Discussion, wiz, no vitriol

And I agree - it's different in college. The difference? A huge effin' payday, not the promise of one. Once the contact is inked, the manager ogften becomes superflous. Read all the Harvard Business Reviews about "motivation other than compensation", but if you've never had that kind of comp before, the management is an afterthought.

If you have mature folks who are accustomed to the earnings, that's different -they're looking beyond the payday because they already are comfortable having it.

.400 or bust

by winningugly on Sep 11, 2007 8:42 PM CDT up reply actions

but as we've discussed in other contexts

[home town discount, being comfortable in a setting, etc.], you may be willing to take a little less to go to team x as opposed to team y. or, conversely, you may need more money from team x to go to them as opposed to team y.

compensation is obviously the #1 factor. but most FAs are getting rather similar offers from at least a couple teams.

Burn it down.

by larry on Sep 11, 2007 8:47 PM CDT up reply actions

Kids care about the jack

No one signs for a hometown discount when they are young, unless their agent (father) has a ton of influence and has a vested interest in the team. Paulie/JD/Mark, etc. are older, have made their bones, and are more about comfort, stability, familiarity. Which is why they'll perform as expected.

All the FA's being discussed - Hunter, Jones, Eck, The Legend (to a lesser extent) have made their bones and may be swayed by the team/manangement, so we'd have a better shot at getting them because of the "intangibles" of Chicago/Sox. Thus, IMO, Ozzie would be more of a factor (positively or negatively) than if it was a young player with their first big contract in front of them. Think A-Rod/Texas then vs. A-Rod/Spanks now.

.400 or bust

by winningugly on Sep 11, 2007 8:59 PM CDT up reply actions

hmmm

maybe. intuitively it sounds right. but then why are young players signing up to long-term deals with the clubs they're with right now? sabbathia and hafner did it this year for these indians. you can look at guys like santana and hunter doing it for the twins in the past. there ain't that many young FAs out there these days.

Burn it down.

by larry on Sep 11, 2007 9:07 PM CDT up reply actions

You think it's because of he manager?

Injus did that with Alomar/Thome/Vizquel, etc. in the '90's. I know the Braves do it, too. IMO, it's because they are home-grown via the minors and are very comfortable with the organization. Cleveland/Atlanta must be great organizations, with great corporate culture.

I see it at Disney - they are recruited out of college, buy into the culture, and sign for much less than the market would bear because they don't know any better, or don't want to go outside their comfort zone. Or because of the name/cache of working for one of the biggest/most recognizable names in the world, and it looks good on a vitae.

Beyond that, when you get a big bump in pay from folks you know and with whom you have a respectful, established relationship, that is a BIG deal, especially if you like them. However, if you are ready to play the field, you play the field.

.400 or bust

by winningugly on Sep 11, 2007 9:16 PM CDT up reply actions

that's not what i was implying

i was responding to your post about it being about the money for young players. obviously it's not all about the money. i'm now confused about your position - the pinot talking? - because in your prior post you say no hometown discount and now you're saying a hometwon discount.

Burn it down.

by larry on Sep 11, 2007 9:20 PM CDT up reply actions

Exception noted

If any young employee feels loyalty to his/her organization because of being mentored there, and is comfortable with the culture, as Cleveland/Atlanta have nurtured over the years, then, yes, someone might sign up for less to stay "home". But most "climbers" want to keep going as far as they can on the upward trajectory and are loyal to their own performance/compensation goals.

I can't believe we have that type of culture that would attract young players because of our history of success/professionalism. Thus, bottom line, I don't think signing Ozzie would afect a kid's decision one way or the other. Maybe a veteran who likes his style, but not a kid free-agent. That's my only point.

.400 or bust

by winningugly on Sep 11, 2007 9:26 PM CDT up reply actions

They actually had him for 2 more if they wanted

He was signed for next year with an optional year - correct?

by Brush Back on Sep 11, 2007 8:33 PM CDT up reply actions

yup

but, as rogers astutely points out in his one lucid post of the month at the trib blog, it would have been a dusty baker-esque media circus next year regarding his status. there's certainty now, for better or for worse.

Burn it down.

by larry on Sep 11, 2007 8:38 PM CDT up reply actions

True...

But unless they were in the running next year, you could wait 20 min into the Comcast sports to hear about the Sox. You know, just like this year, after the Cubs, Mil., SL, and Bears.
As you said "lame duck situations...", good or bad, who knows.

by Brush Back on Sep 11, 2007 9:02 PM CDT up reply actions

Rogers...

I liked how the first commenter called him on his comparison of Garner and Guillen. Garner has what, 3 or 4 winning seasons in 14 years? Guillen has 3 winning seasons in 4. Maybe Guillen never has another, I don't know. But at this point, that's a ludicrous comparison. And I'm not even a huge fan of Guillen.

by hitlesswonder on Sep 11, 2007 9:33 PM CDT up reply actions

What's the $$$ amount?

He was on the low end of the scale before, did they get him cheap again?

"I thought we were just playing bad, but, no, we're horseshit." - Oswaldo Guillen, Sr.

by ChicagoPete on Sep 11, 2007 8:55 PM CDT reply actions

a few more

whalen:

Ozzie Guillen is back through at least 2012. This is, unequivocally, a great move.

fjm:

Not content with a horrible 2007, the White Sox have decided to lock in a horrible 2008-2012.

cowley:

Welcome to the White Sox organization, where they continue to walk to the beat of their own drum -- and to hell with what anyone else thinks. That was the underlying message delivered Tuesday when the Sox announced that last place in the American League Central had earned manager Ozzie Guillen a contract extension through the 2012 season.

by The Wizard on Sep 12, 2007 5:15 PM CDT reply actions