SI: Beinfest Game's 4th Best GM....Errr...President of BBO

[Swifty]

Yes, I believe he does more good than bad.

Boner is on him, to be sure. He sucks, and he should have replaced him way earlier. We could have made it to the playoffs if he traded for NJ in May.

But is it Larry Beinfest's fault that Jorge Julio had 9.1 crap innings with us sandwiched between 44 innings of 3.83 ERA in Zona beforehand and 52.2 innings of 3.93 ERA in Colorado afterward?

Jorge Julio sucked for us, but I'm not sure that can be put on Beinfest. He was solid in the time surrounding his time with us and just shit all over himself for the equivalent of one full game with us. How much can you put of that on Beinfest? He stuck with him for all of two weeks as the closer, that's not really a "he's our guy" situation on the Bonifacio level.


You can't put Julio on him completely and then not give credit for Uggla, Cody, Cantu, Kiko, Dan Meyer, etc. He's done more good than bad for us, absolutely.

You can't say that one player is so bad that replacing him means we make the playoffs and then say there's more good than bad done. If it were an untenable situation with holes everywhere, then fine, stick with it, hope you can salvage something but if replacing one player, by your own admission, is the difference between the golf course and the playoffs yet a stubborn cowboy mentality keeps that player in the lineup, I'm sorry, that's more harm done than a GM should be allowed to simply chalk up to "well, we tried."

[Bobbob1313]

You can't put anybody bad on him because he never expected any of those guys to be as bad as they ended up being. Right? That's how it works, no?

No.

I'm just saying that it's easy to get hung up on a guy like Jorge Julio being really, spectacularly awful for two weeks and say that's an example of why he sucks.
--------------------

You can't say that one player is so bad that replacing him means we make the playoffs and then say there's more good than bad done. If it were an untenable situation with holes everywhere, then fine, stick with it, hope you can salvage something but if replacing one player, by your own admission, is the difference between the golf course and the playoffs yet a stubborn cowboy mentality keeps that player in the lineup, I'm sorry, that's more harm done than a GM should be allowed to simply chalk up to "well, we tried."

Larry Beinfest has only been the GM for one season?

On the whole, he does more harm than good. Yes, that's his biggest blunder, and yes, it did cost us the playoffs. We are also not in the discussion if he doesn't add Kiko Calero, Dan Meyer, Leo Nunez, and Ross Gload in the offseason.

[Beef]

Based on your reasoning, it seems that only things that go wrong should be counted in the "Is this a good GM" tally.

Yeah, any time a player becomes one of the best players in baseball it is slightly luck. Nobody anywhere with anything ever can say, this thing right here is undoubtedly going to be the best thing around. (Besides JJ with the Cavs last year).

He got a player that he assumed would be very good.

Things worked out and the player turned out to be great.

It seems really simple.

I wonder how many GMs go after players and think, geez, I hope this guy never progresses and gets any better than I expected him to be.

When you are getting that deep into trying to discount/discredit Beinfest, you have to do the same thing for every other GM, and they all have ginat faults and flaws as well.
--------------------

No.

I'm just saying that it's easy to get hung up on a guy like Jorge Julio being really, spectacularly awful for two weeks and say that's an example of why he sucks.
--------------------


Larry Beinfest has only been the GM for one season?

I know what you are doing. I am using nny reasoning.

You can't count the extra good because he didnt expect that a player would be THAT good, so you cant count the shitty because no way he went after Julio with the idea that Julio would be THAT bad

[Swifty]

I wish my friend from SFX didn't tell me about the Miggy negotiations, but there's more than Jorge Julio to "why he sucks."

He sucks because he didn't try to extend Pudge in season when he said he'd take 3/$21

He sucks because he didn't buy out arbitration on Miggy or Dontrelle.

He sucks because he didn't even pick up the phone to call Urbina after 2003.

He sucks because he felt that he could deal Penny because Pavano would want to stay without even beginning contract talks with him.

He sucks because he made Jeremy Hermida untouchable in 2005 trade talks for players like Zito yet doesn't promote him until August 31 and doesn't even give a mandate to play him.

He sucks because he stalks players until he can finally overpay for them, like Julio and LoDuca.

He sucks because he's infatuated with the readings on the radar gun and keeps people like Julio and Lindstrom around well past their effectiveness.

He sucks because he extended Lowell when Cabrera was already in house.

He sucks because he went to the negotiating table with Cabrera and gave him one take it or leave it offer for a long term contract and instead went to arbitration where he got his ass kicked and cost the franchise the best player it's ever going to have (yeah, I said it).

He sucks because he traded Josh Willingham and Scott Olsen for Emilio Bonifacio

He sucks because he didn't pull the plug on Bonifacio.

He's awesome because he wins on a budget. Yay.

[nny]

Based on your reasoning, it seems that only things that go wrong should be counted in the "Is this a good GM" tally.

...

When you are getting that deep into trying to discount/discredit Beinfest, you have to do the same thing for every other GM, and they all have ginat faults and flaws as well.

Has nothing to do with "things that go wrong." It has to do with what he has control over. i.e. Pudge was a good move. He himself had no control over what Hanley became, so that should not be something that counts towards him.

And the same should apply to every GM. You shouldn't judge somebody with what they have no control over. I never said otherwise?
--------------------

You can't count the extra good because he didnt expect that a player would be THAT good, so you cant count the shitty because no way he went after Julio with the idea that Julio would be THAT bad

Has less to do with expectation but rather, as Swift put it, the process.

Julio was a bad reliever before he came here. He should have been expected to be bad here (Unless they thought they saw some flaw and could "fix" him, but that's not something we know), so that shows a probable flaw in the process.

Him being as bad as he was shouldn't be on Beinfest though.

[Bobbob1313]

I wish my friend from SFX didn't tell me about the Miggy negotiations, but there's more than Jorge Julio to "why he sucks."

He sucks because he didn't try to extend Pudge in season when he said he'd take 3/$21

He sucks because he didn't buy out arbitration on Miggy or Dontrelle.

He sucks because he didn't even pick up the phone to call Urbina after 2003.

He sucks because he felt that he could deal Penny because Pavano would want to stay without even beginning contract talks with him.

He sucks because he made Jeremy Hermida untouchable in 2005 trade talks for players like Zito yet doesn't promote him until August 31 and doesn't even give a mandate to play him.

He sucks because he stalks players until he can finally overpay for them, like Julio and LoDuca.

He sucks because he's infatuated with the readings on the radar gun and keeps people like Julio and Lindstrom around well past their effectiveness.

He sucks because he extended Lowell when Cabrera was already in house.

He sucks because he went to the negotiating table with Cabrera and gave him one take it or leave it offer for a long term contract and instead went to arbitration where he got his ass kicked and cost the franchise the best player it's ever going to have (yeah, I said it).

He sucks because he traded Josh Willingham and Scott Olsen for Emilio Bonifacio

He sucks because he didn't pull the plug on Bonifacio.

He's awesome because he wins on a budget. Yay.

Hanley is a better player than Miguel Cabrera. Yeah, I said it.


I guess you're right, though. He's only done bad things.

[nny]

He sucks because he didn't even pick up the phone to call Urbina after 2003.

Urbina was injured, which is why we didn't offer him arbitration and he didn't sign until, either the start of ST or after and missed first few weeks of the season and had an ineffective season.

I don't see how that could be used against him and likely is the same deal with Kiko this past offseason.

[Beef]

Has nothing to do with "things that go wrong." It has to do with what he has control over. i.e. Pudge was a good move. He himself had no control over what Hanley became, so that should not be something that counts towards him.

And the same should apply to every GM. You shouldn't judge somebody with what they have no control over. I never said otherwise?
--------------------


Has less to do with expectation but rather, as Swift put it, the process.

Julio was a bad reliever before he came here. He should have been expected to be bad here (Unless they thought they saw some flaw and could "fix" him, but that's not something we know), so that shows a probable flaw in the process.

Him being as bad as he was shouldn't be on Beinfest though.

So he went through a process in which he wanted to make sure he got Hanley in any deal with the Red Sox. The process matters less there than what exactly he expected Hanley to become

[Bobbob1313]

A lot of those have responses like that, and there's also lot's of good things he's done that Swift ignores.

[nny]

So he went through a process in which he wanted to make sure he got Hanley in any deal with the Red Sox. The process matters less there than what exactly he expected Hanley to become

No.

Expectations are part of the process.

I'm saying Hanley being as good as Hanley is shouldn't be counted towards him.
--------------------
Let me try this again.

Beinfest is lucky Hanley became what he became.

The Marlins are good because Hanley became what he became.

Ergo, Beinfest is lucky the Marlins are good.

Considering you seem to constantly misunderstand what I'm saying, does that better portray what I meant?

[Swifty]

Hanley is a better player than Miguel Cabrera. Yeah, I said it.


I guess you're right, though. He's only done bad things.

You're missing the point. These are correctible things that a "good" GM does not do. This isn't bemoaning passing on Taylor Teagarden about 4900240 times in '05 or taking 5 pitchers instead of Volstad and Ellsbury and then still getting the signability players later. Every GM is riddled with what if's like that.

Those are the kind of mistakes a GM does not do if he is not going to stand in between his team and the best W/L record he can produce.
--------------------
And, lastly, you act as if Beinfest deserves extra credit for doing good things in the name of winning. As if trying to win is a novel concept Beinfest invented. Excuse me for thinking that "doing your job" does not earn you extra special credit when your flaws are so mind numbingly bad.

[lou]

A lot to digest, however after reading all this, this is what strikes my mind so I guess these are the most important things:

-We want to yell at him for going Pokey/Castillo/Others, and not giving him credit to Uggla/Cantu/Whoever because they were back up plans? Maybe the "primary" (and that's arguable) move in these circumstances did not work out, but I have to give him credit for bringing depth into the organization. And it's worked out in nearly all of these situations. Maybe we had to endure bad springs, or some poor pitching performances, but then Uggla happens. Cantu happens. Wes Helms 2006 version happens. All of the acceptable relievers from Gardner and Justin Miller, to Benitez (first time), Todd Jones, etc. I have no problem with any of this, and I really can't see how anyone would. No one expected Uggla to become Uggla. No one expected Cantu to get back to an .800ish OPSing level. No one expected Ross to become a plus defender and a truly legitimate bat. Who cares. He liked these guys. He brought them in. It worked out. I cannot think of another organization that has been this successful pulling off a ton of their starters from the Rule V (Uggla), MILB deals (Cantu), waivers (Ross), and minor league trades (Baker). This is really really legit.

-Yes, it's very annoying to have suffered Abercrombie/Bonifacio/Treanor and other stuff that obviously was not going to work out.

-Drafting. There are certainly questionable selections, but this happens across the board. I've always agreed with Swift's vendetta for not selecting Ellsbury instead of one of them, but I can't be happy/disappointed here. Johnson is great, they've developed a number of other major leaguers. As of last year, we had a top 5 farm system before the tons of graduations, and the only guy in the Top 10 who Beinfest didn't draft was Maybin. He's not bad here, and if the AA/AAA kids work out, people are going to start considering him one of the best drafters around. Really.

-Trades. Sure, no one expected Hanley this good, but he also didn't expect him to be bad. Even if Hanley is an .850-.875 guy that peaks at 18-20 HR, we're all still super into that trade as that's still a cornerstone building block. Cabrera, I can't fault the value with two top 10 prospects. Maybe it hasn't panned out, but on paper it was not terrible combined with the contract. The process of the trade was fine even if it didn't pan out. Which leads into below, however how about a little credit for DECIMATING the Cubs for Juan Pierre and regardless if you think Urbina was good or not, we did have two 1B prospects at that point and Urbina (as well as picking up Chad Fox for nothing) were the missing pieces. Chris Resop turned into Gregg. Mike Jacobs for Nunez. Stokes for Baker. Great stuff here. Not every trade is going to work out, but I think there is clearly more good than bad here.

-Not buying out arbitration. By far, the worst thing he does. However, seeing recent examples of Hanley and Johnson, I am INTO waiting 2 years in order to get a free agency year or two, versus doing it after year 1. I think a lot of this had to deal with Loria/Samson refusing guaranteed contracts to players they had under club control. The risk/reward wasn't worth it. I will fault them forever for Cabrera, but I don't think this is 100% Beinfest. I think this will show itself in two years with how we handle Coghlan, Volstad, Maybin, etc, and I bet we start tendering 5 year contracts to players with 2-3 years of experience. There is one thing to be philosophically against buyouts, there is another being handcuffed with ownership. Let's say hypothetically we had buyouts. We'd be stuck with Willis and Hermida for serious cash right now. That would kinda suck. This plays both ways. Basically, I can't dump all of this one onto Beinfest.


I don't think he's 4th best, but I'd say 7-10 range for sure, with improvement to grow if these new buyouts start happening to legitimate young players, more consistent drafting, acknowledging problems and going out and getting Nick Johnson, and taking some more risks internationally, i.e. bidding aggressively for Chapman which is something we haven't done in years.

I really don't understand all the hate. Yea, the "his guys" argument is frustrating and hopefully he starts caring less about tools (speed, 95 mph fastball) and more about "tangible production," but I don't fault him for trying these guys. I only fault him for not pulling EB after 2 months. The problem was keeping him in there June and July, not April and May, etc. And I really don't see something like that happening again considering he will (theoretically) start having $60-70-80 million dollar payrolls so the options aren't Bonifacio, AAAA players, and a Rule V pick.

[nny]

-We want to yell at him for going Pokey/Castillo/Others, and not giving him credit to Uggla/Cantu/Whoever because they were back up plans? Maybe the "primary" (and that's arguable) move in these circumstances did not work out, but I have to give him credit for bringing depth into the organization. And it's worked out in nearly all of these situations. Maybe we had to endure bad springs, or some poor pitching performances, but then Uggla happens. Cantu happens. Wes Helms 2006 version happens. All of the acceptable relievers from Gardner and Justin Miller, to Benitez (first time), Todd Jones, etc. I have no problem with any of this, and I really can't see how anyone would. No one expected Uggla to become Uggla. No one expected Cantu to get back to an .800ish OPSing level. No one expected Ross to become a plus defender and a truly legitimate bat. Who cares. He liked these guys. He brought them in. It worked out. I cannot think of another organization that has been this successful pulling off a ton of their starters from the Rule V (Uggla), MILB deals (Cantu), waivers (Ross), and minor league trades (Baker). This is really really legit.

My question regarding it though is if he's so good at the minor moves, why isn't he so good at the major moves? Since he has been rather bad at major moves, and an organization will make so many minor moves that some are bound to work out, that it is instead an indication he's been "lucky" with the minor moves?

Give me enough chances and I'll make 10 three pointers in a row. That doesn't mean I'm good at shooting 3's. Are we simple witnessing a "hot streak"?

You could certainly make the other argument instead that he hasn't made many major moves, so that instead that is the small sample size and luck factored one. My only issue with that is that his "minor" moves, the guys who work out are way down on the list and in most cases take years to actually get starting gigs while his "first choices" get infinite chances to suck ass. More or less the "Beinfest guys" issues.

-Drafting. There are certainly questionable selections, but this happens across the board. I've always agreed with Swift's vendetta for not selecting Ellsbury instead of one of them, but I can't be happy/disappointed here. Johnson is great, they've developed a number of other major leaguers. As of last year, we had a top 5 farm system before the tons of graduations, and the only guy in the Top 10 who Beinfest didn't draft was Maybin. He's not bad here, and if the AA/AAA kids work out, people are going to start considering him one of the best drafters around. Really.

This is not an issue with Beinfest but rather an issue with articles like the one above that talked about how good our club has been because of our farm. But we're currently looking at 2 starting position players (1 of which being a rookie), 1 bench bat, 2-3 SP, and probably no BP arm.

Again not an issue with Beinfest, doesn't matter how you make a winning team, I just hate media people who say that.

-Trades. Sure, no one expected Hanley this good, but he also didn't expect him to be bad. Even if Hanley is an .850-.875 guy that peaks at 18-20 HR, we're all still super into that trade as that's still a cornerstone building block. Cabrera, I can't fault the value with two top 10 prospects. Maybe it hasn't panned out, but on paper it was not terrible combined with the contract. The process of the trade was fine even if it didn't pan out. Which leads into below, however how about a little credit for DECIMATING the Cubs for Juan Pierre and regardless if you think Urbina was good or not, we did have two 1B prospects at that point and Urbina (as well as picking up Chad Fox for nothing) were the missing pieces. Chris Resop turned into Gregg. Mike Jacobs for Nunez. Stokes for Baker. Great stuff here. Not every trade is going to work out, but I think there is clearly more good than bad here.

Even putting Hanley at that point is extremely gracious. And for Cabrera, I just can't stand getting Miller.

When we got Miller, we always knew he'd be a work in progress. People constantly say now "Yeah he's sucked, but look at Randy Johnson!"

Here's the thing. Let's say he turns into Randy Johnson when he's 26. What organization is he going to be with then? Not us.

We need players who can produce during their cost and club controlled years. Not projects. I'm obviously not saying every player we trade for needs to be Hanely and Cabs out the gates. And if we even started Miller in the minors, I'm likely not complaining about him. So this might have less to do with "trading for Miller" and more with how we treated Miller.

Miller's really the only player I can think of like that though. It'd be easy to put Hermida here, but it's also easy to forget just how good he was in '07.

But if the Dodgers really proposed Billingsley, Kemp, and Loney at the deadline and we didn't take it, I think that's a major ball dropping by Beinfest. He had to have known then that Cabs would be traded that offseason. Billingsley and Kemp were already proven ML commodities and essentially Maybin and Miller become them.

Also, I don't think he's bad. I just question whether things he gets credit for (and all GMs) is something that is actually worth getting credit for.

[PitchingWinsGames]

My question regarding it though is if he's so good at the minor moves, why isn't he so good at the major moves? Since he has been rather bad at major moves, and an organization will make so many minor moves that some are bound to work out, that it is instead an indication he's been "lucky" with the minor moves?

Give me enough chances and I'll make 10 three pointers in a row. That doesn't mean I'm good at shooting 3's. Are we simple witnessing a "hot streak"?

You could certainly make the other argument instead that he hasn't made many major moves, so that instead that is the small sample size and luck factored one. My only issue with that is that his "minor" moves, the guys who work out are way down on the list and in most cases take years to actually get starting gigs while his "first choices" get infinite chances to suck ass. More or less the "Beinfest guys" issues.

This is what kept coming to mind to me as I read this.

How much of Beinfest making awesome minor moves is because he is essentially forced by payroll to make them? And at the end of the day, if Beinfest drops the ball on a Jose Castillo, we shrug it off and say "Well, it was just a ST invite" but then when Cantu comes out of nowhere it's "Wow that Beinfest sure did a great job finding that Jorge guy!" when it was basically going through bodies until someone didn't totally suck.

Yes, there is a certain praise-worthy aspect to saying he didn't put all his eggs in one basket, but should I praise the cook at a restaurant for not burning the food?

I agree with Lou when he says Beinfest is likely not a top 5 GM but probably solidly a top 10, but at the same time, we still haven't seen what he could/would do with a realistic payroll and, ergo, the opportunity to throw money around and make mistakes like that. (See, Delgado) Although, there's no guarantee he would do that poorly or well or anywhere in between.

[Metes]

I don't think you'll make 10 three pointers in a row, that's a lot of three pointers to make in a row