Giancarlo: "I Do Not Like This at All”

[emkayseven]

And the excuses continue for this FO. But its okay, 'cause the Marlins don't have any fans.

what we can all agree on is that this is the best and most appropriate use of an emoticon in board history

[Beef]

I don't think there is much reasoning going on with oakelmpine posts. They're long, not reasoned.

[Swifty]

The "fake" Dodgers one was the Kemp/Kershaw super trade. As far as I'm aware, Kershaw was never really "on" the table. That's the fake Dodgers trade. Kemp was in play.

[emkayseven]

The "fake" Dodgers one was the Kemp/Kershaw super trade. As far as I'm aware, Kershaw was never really "on" the table. That's the fake Dodgers trade. Kemp was in play.

I would love to see some proof/written record of that
--------------------

The Dodgers are being asked to pony up four of Chad Billingsley, Clayton Kershaw, Andy LaRoche, James Loney, and Matt Kemp. Capozzi suggests the Dodgers would probably only include one of the pitchers. Even so, a Kershaw/LaRoche/Loney/Kemp package is insane for one player. That has to be well over $100MM of value - a bit less than 20 team-controlled seasons. Three of the five would still make for a sweet bounty.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2007/1...qC1ugAHvqmh.99

We asked them to, so clearly he was on the table. Like when Theo asked us about Hanley and the world freaked out that we were shopping Hanley.

[Beef]

The Dodgers are being asked to pony up four of Chad Billingsley, Clayton Kershaw, Andy LaRoche, James Loney, and Matt Kemp. Capozzi suggests the Dodgers would probably only include one of the pitchers. Even so, a Kershaw/LaRoche/Loney/Kemp package is insane for one player. That has to be well over $100MM of value - a bit less than 20 team-controlled seasons. Three of the five would still make for a sweet bounty. The team acquiring Cabrera would probably be compelled to lock him in past 2009.
Read more at http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2007/1...0fiwTPZrame.99


I guess there is that?
--------------------
Ugh

[Erick]

The funny part is that even if Kemp/Kershaw were available (which is unknown), many scouts (probably the majority) would've preferred Maybin/Miller at the time.

By the way, can anyone provide a link to Hank Blalock being "Plan A" in the Beckett discussions? Because I don't recall that being the case; I recall that that it was a rumor and we were interested, but that's about it. Seems like nitpicking but no surprise from Swift.

2003-2004, just about everyone thought Jason Stokes was a better prospect than Adrian Gonzalez. Fucking assholes, that front office. I'm surprised Loria even tried to acquire a closer at the time considering how cheap he is, regardless of winning/losing...

Also, the front office is completely clueless as evidenced by all of this, but they're also geniuses for the Dan Uggla Rule V pick. The Jorge Cantu, Cody Ross bargains. The years when relievers used to work out for them like they do for the Rays now. Etc. Geniuses. Or maybe they were just lucky with those, I'm not sure. Maybe Loria gave those players incentives to perform better than their actual ability. And then when they did, Loria didn't reward them thus further proving that he's a liar. Like Fidel Castro.

[CrimsonCane]

Isn't it the job of the front office to be better evaluators of talent than the general consensus? If not, then anyone with a Baseball America subscription is equally qualified to make these decisions.

[Omar]

Pretty much exactly what I was thinking. If general managers can't be held accountable for their evaluations, then what's the point in even having one?

[Mainge]

Isn't it the job of the front office to be better evaluators of talent than the general consensus? If not, then anyone with a Baseball America subscription is equally qualified to make these decisions.

I don't know about Baseball America subscriptions, but I feel like there are a number of posters here who would be better qualified than most of the GM's in the league.

[Beef]

I think they can be held accountable, but pretty douchey or hypocritical for one of us to say we like a deal at one point and later say what a stupid idiot for liking that deal!

Also, we're saying it was a majority of general managers that would have loved to get those two guys, not just ba or fangraphs

[Omar]

Fair, though not all of us liked the deal at the time (I realize there's no way of proving this since that was at least one message board ago, but I'm sure the parties involved will remember who was on what side).

Is there a standard we can agree upon to measure our general manager by? Not other teams, since we don't root for them nor do we have any financial investment with same. What would our acceptable standard be for determining whether our front office has done a good job be?

'There is no way to judge' is not an acceptable answer.

[Beef]

I guess it can be judged - bit if you are one who liked the deal it has to come with an admission of guilt and a promise not to opine on such things without mentioning that you blew it before, just like them

That's my standard

[Mainge]

Fair, though not all of us liked the deal at the time (I realize there's no way of proving this since that was at least one message board ago, but I'm sure the parties involved will remember who was on what side).

Is there a standard we can agree upon to measure our general manager by? Not other teams, since we don't root for them nor do we have any financial investment with same. What would our acceptable standard be for determining whether our front office has done a good job be?

'There is no way to judge' is not an acceptable answer.

Shouldn't he always be measured against his peers?

[Erick]

Isn't it the job of the front office to be better evaluators of talent than the general consensus? If not, then anyone with a Baseball America subscription is equally qualified to make these decisions.

Yes.

But did any front office in baseball think Andrew Miller would become an absolute bust at the time he was traded? I mean, maybe others thought he wouldn't become a potential ace, but when the guy becomes an absolute bust...doesn't that kind of become bad luck to an extent?

I have a hard time pretending a GM is an idiot for moves like that.

Dayton Moore paying mediocre pitchers a good amount of money this offseason...that's stupid. It's clear. I'm not sure anyone involved in the game (nevermind this board or general opinion) can predict that top prospects with all the tools to be great could become busts.

At the time, I would imagine every organization in baseball wanted a pitcher like Andrew Miller and a CF'er like Cameron Maybin in their farm system.

[CrimsonCane]

It's not really fair to compare a fans evaluation of the trade with the front office. The fan is necessarily reliant on the opinions of others because they can't really observe and evaluate prospects on their own, unless they rely exclusively on available statistical data.
So, when a fan says that they love a trade, it's typically because someone they read said it was a good trade.

But it's the job of the front office to personally evaluate these players. They are privy to information that the average fan is not. And, presumably they are more adept at seeing untapped potential. They can make evaluations that are in no way reliant on the opinion of others. With that comes a greater level of accountability and higher expectations.

Also, it doesn't really matter how many GMs would have made that same decision. Our payroll is such that we have to be smarter than the majority of GMs in the league to contend (absent getting lucky).

Lastly, Im not saying that I expect other worldly talent evaluation from the front office. I question how much of talent evaluation is skill versus luck all the time. But, if the front office is not going to have an advantage on the evaluation side. They got to be smart on the money management side of things. That's a skill that is definitely identifiable. And, I think our front office is sadly lacking in that category. They don't make smart money decisions and it really holds this team back from having any sort of long term plan except "Let's hope that all of these players all play at or near their ceiling all at the same time."