I was listening to The Athletic's Giants podcast & thought Duggan had a good point re. Abrams being the next GM: let's say the Giants have a rough 2020 season & go something like 4-12 again. There's going to be a ton of pressure to get rid of Gettleman. So DG is shown the door...how does Mara sell to the fan base replacing him with Abrahams? 'Hey, yeah Dave's gone, but we're replacing him with our assistant GM.' That's like the house being on fire & asking one of the arsonists to help put out the flames.
I know they've been grooming him to be the next Giants GM for awhile, but if that happens,come on...that'd be weak AF.
The issue is that it’s the same concern with Abrams that he would be promoted along the lines of similar logic.
The credentials and selection process of the Giants has been called into question by me and others including the article I shared about quoting various analytics experts. I’ve been saying this for years and the Giants finally admitted this offseason that the people in charge weren’t paying enough attention to this and had to change. I wouldn’t have said word 1 about any of this if the Giants weren’t an on field embarrassment.
You on the other hand attacked me from day one demanding to know how I could possibly have the information that the giants weren’t well positioned to modernize given their leadership. (Which, again turned out to be the correct assertion by me) Then you say things like I have a fake resume and I am pompous when you are the one that provides very little information and just attacks anyone that thinks the Giants leadership aren’t given what you view as the proper reverence. You don’t know me, you don’t know what I’ve done in my career yet you act like you do. You act like you know about a lot of things you don’t.
Even DG can come out and admit he did a bad job modernizing the Giants why can’t you acknowledge that you put way to much faith them without even really understanding the types of qualifications it takes to build a system like the better NFL teams have. So yeah it’s no surprise to me that they had to acknowledge “they made mistakes” the biggest one was acting like they were competent in areas they weren’t when other teams made huge strides prioritizing those areas
Abrams being the future GM actually can be quite beneficial. If he stays in his lane and we bring in the talent evaluator, it can be a very nice match.
Jumping the gun about hiring within being bad is a waste of time. It’s arguing just to argue.
And good lord enough with the analytics department lectures.
Not being able to manage through the end of the post championship era is a mark on ownership, not a mitigating factor.
Mara clearly had a lot of emotional investment in Coughlin, Reese, and Manning -- and he fumbled his way through all three exiting.
A sentimental owner is a liability. If Gettleman can't get the engine out stall, I hope the sentimentality doesn't apply to him too.
the story is silly, they aren't grooming Abrams to be the GM. He is a contracts and cap guy, not a talent guy.
What’s funny is the analytics crowd in the media still praises the job he did.
That’s what kills me about the analytics media (usually in their low 30’s), they are so freakin arrogant. I’m a believer in analytics, but the Kevin Clark’s of the world cannot see beyond it at all.
Had the Giants drafted Sam Darnold in 2018, Eli closed out two lackluster 6-10 seasons to end his career in Jax & the Giants went 6-10 & 7-9 each of the last two seasons (and that’s being generous), would you be much happier with how things play out?
Quote:
and went 1-31.
What’s funny is the analytics crowd in the media still praises the job he did.
That’s what kills me about the analytics media (usually in their low 30’s), they are so freakin arrogant. I’m a believer in analytics, but the Kevin Clark’s of the world cannot see beyond it at all.
They're like freaking Scientologists.
I think that’s a fallacious line of argument. There are a number of other viable alternatives that have been debated to exhaustion.
I have beyond zero sentimentality for any players and coaches. When they don’t perform, I’d prefer they be replaced. Holding onto players and coaches because they are legends is infuriating.
Favre was a Jet, Montana was Chief, Brady is a Buc. Life goes on.
For me the, Giants made two critical mistakes last decade:
- Retaining Reese during the Coughlin “resigning” charade
- Retaining Manning after the 2017 season
I don’t believe the Giants were sentenced to this shitty stretch.
Many franchises, successful ones even, operate similarly to Mara. It’s how he chooses to run his business and they’ve been successful. Championships are great but they aren’t the only reason for being in business, whether you like it or not.
Had the Giants drafted Sam Darnold in 2018, Eli closed out two lackluster 6-10 seasons to end his career in Jax & the Giants went 6-10 & 7-9 each of the last two seasons (and that’s being generous), would you be much happier with how things play out?
I would prefer that we went into this off season as a 7 win team as opposed to a 4 win team, so I guess yes, I would be happier with your hypothetical.
I mean, 7 wins this year gets you paid on the over.
I like Danny Dimes just fine, but I'm sure I could just as easily root for mono boy if he is winning some games.
Many franchises, successful ones even, operate similarly to Mara. It’s how he chooses to run his business and they’ve been successful. Championships are great but they aren’t the only reason for being in business, whether you like it or not.
A lot of pro sports teams are successful primarily because someone made a good decision 50 or 60 years ago and there is no competition.
But there is no doubting the John Mara has been successful, the value of the franchise has gone up exponentially under his watch. Unfortunately for the fans, the main actions he has taken to increase that figure, building a new stadium with PSL money, pretty much sucked for the fanbase.
But being a shitty team before or after the PSLs is all the same. You are buying tickets to a good product or bad product but it’s on you either way. I feel Mara does what he thinks is best the vast majority of the time but has made some big mistakes that are glaring. It happens.
You’d think we all agree on that, sadly I don’t think that’s the case.
I didn’t say they were alone. Kind of ties into my point about the lack competition. All these owners get away with highway robbery Because there’s no other game in town.
I’ll go one further. If I was in John Maras shoes I probably would’ve launched PSL’s as well. I’d like to think I would’ve signed off on a better designed stadium though, at least aesthetically.
In addition to being privately financed, the teams also at least pay property taxes. I know they got some land and NJ put up money for train and road extensions, but it's nothing like much richer owners have taken.
I respect Mara, he's a good man. I just want him to field a better football team. That's literally my only stake in being a Giants fan -- rooting for them to win.
While sometimes the manager ( Torre) was an external hire the coaching and FO and advisors were loaded with ex New York Yankees. For decades.
Roy White, Willie Randolph, Mattingly, Stottlemyre, Reggie Jackson, Gossage, Guidry, Dent, Mazzilli, Yogi Berra, Clete Boyer, Chambliss, Girardi, Whitey Ford, Crosetti, Rizzuto, Mantle, Nettles, Gene Michael, Stump Merrill, Pepitone, Pinella, Stearns, Jeff Torborg, Stan Williams, Don Zimmer and one Aaron Boone.
Ex Dodgers? Ex Mets? ex Raiders? ex Steelers? ex Cardinals?
Now lets turn to professional soccer?
Ex alumni at major college football and basketball programs?
Ex Celtics after Red Auerbach?
Ex Chicago Cubs?
Ex San Francisco Giant ex players on staff or managing?
This is like shooting fish in a barrel
Guess how many during the 1978 WS winning team?
How many were functional alcoholics?
Oh right...wait a second...those were years they had good players
That’s what I’m talking about being unprecedented, picking parts out of what someone says without taking in the full context is arguing in bad faith.
My point was always about the main qualifications for internal hires should be some successes to point to. What are those for Abrams?
If instead of your 30K view you’d like to dive down and explain that those franchises didn’t essentially let their fan bases know that they were ready to line the next person up for the job irrespective of bad on field performance I’d love to get that history lesson.
The point is it’s all over the news and we never get a good explanation for why it should be him. And that seems like you are just holding up a big sign that says you care more about doing things your way than trying to find the best way
It is just getting absurd.
Hell, everyone and their mother knew Roy Williams was taking the UNC job and it isn't like UNC prepped the fans and the Media on the pending move, and Roy was so eager to talk about it that after Syracuse beat him in the NCAA Finals he said "I don't give a shit about the UNC situation right now".
You know why teams don't prop up a guy before he takes a job? Because what if it doesn't happen? Everyone expected Bill to be the Giants HC. It didn't happen. Everyone expected Mike Hopkins to be the dutiful assistant until Boeheim steps down.
Everyone expected Jerry Richardson's sons to stay with the team and succeed him until he lost his mind and alienated them. Hell, they expected Brandon Beane to succeed Gettleman there.
You are so entrenched in saying the Giants Way is the wrong way that you are blatantly ignoring history and applying criticisms that don't have any merit.
The giants don't owe you, me or the fucking fencepost an explanation on Abrahms before he is named GM or whatever his future holds for him
That’s what I’m talking about being unprecedented, picking parts out of what someone says without taking in the full context is arguing in bad faith.
My point was always about the main qualifications for internal hires should be some successes to point to. What are those for Abrams?
If instead of your 30K view you’d like to dive down and explain that those franchises didn’t essentially let their fan bases know that they were ready to line the next person up for the job irrespective of bad on field performance I’d love to get that history lesson.
The point is it’s all over the news and we never get a good explanation for why it should be him. And that seems like you are just holding up a big sign that says you care more about doing things your way than trying to find the best way
The story is BS from top to bottom. No one has anointed Abrams the next GM. He's been an Assistant GM since the beginning of Accorsi's tenure more than 20 years ago; Gettleman is his 3rd GM. If they wanted to promote him they would have already.
Gene Michael
Aaron Boone
Mel Stottlemyre
Joe Torre
No analytics, no cutting edge models, no predictive tests/factor analysis.
Yet they did...imagine that
Now lets look at a real predictive anomalies where incumbencies showed nothing as to what was ahead:
Casey Stengel - would you take his managerial record?
Or lets predict the likely success of these two 18 year olds:
1) Lost his entire primary family, mother, father ( died when he was 5), brothers by the time he was 14. Was a boy soldier captured and tortured before escaping. Lost 12 other members of his uncles and cousins before 16. Lost his first wife after two years. Was unable to make a living as a self taught lawyer and had to move several times before 30.
2) Son of a failed father and an illegimate daughter of a prostitute born into a house over 10 miles from any other. Both were illiterate and could not read or write or sign their name, Mother died when he was 3. Father lost home in legal dispute and they became squatters in an open sided lean too. Brother and sister died by time he was 6.
Has a grand total of one year of schooling in his life. Was destitute and near starvation many years. Lived in barns.
Fortunately his step mother taught him to read.
Now 18, his main skill was splitting logs.
Now, take those traumatized profiles, sure to predict mental illness, violent short lives filled with refuge in drugs or alcohol, excuses and utter failure ---and go analyze any predictive scientific approach to their likely future.
The first is Andrew Jackson and the second the least educated, poorest President we ever had.
Maybe we all would be better off a little less sure of ourselves
If the argument is that knowing people and trusting them is of extreme value, I would never argue against that.
Where it gets tough is when it feels like familiarity and trust trumps a thoughtful process of when factors outside of concrete performance have gone from essential parts of a broader equation vs overweighted factors in the decision point of power and influence in an organization.
Why would they? No one has the slightest idea who will do great or horrible or in between.
Any evidence the NYG makes decisions before they have to?
Organizations gossip all the time. Organizations make tentative maybe it depends plans and almost always have a few candidates they keep an eye on.
Organizations make final decisions when they have to.
This is before we recognize that there is flexibility in the roles of all management froups.
Also I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that Abrams is the next GM. Petit is really well spoken and has done an excellent job since taking over the drafts. What happens on the field and how the current crop of young players and coaches develop (or don't) will be a big factor in whatever happens when Gettleman rides off.
Loyalty shown previous coaching staff?
Data is not supporting the certitude of the contention?
Inflection points in org trends are hard to spot but disastrous analysis follows missing when they might be in flex.
Certitude is the enemy of good analysis
Loyalty shown previous coaching staff?
Data is not supporting the certitude of the contention?
Inflection points in org trends are hard to spot but disastrous analysis follows missing when they might be in flex.
Certitude is the enemy of good analysis
One other factor that's always flown in the face of this rationale is the fact that Gettleman literally got fired over being overly confrontational with the owner in CAR. I'm not lionizing him but if they wanted a true yes man there were likely better candidates. The fact that he was known and there was an existing relationship was almost definitely in his favor but he's also shown willingness to do unpopular things against the grain.
Whether or not he was the right hire is still very much up in the air but as you pointed out his tenure has certainly not been business as usual.
Whether that ascendancy is common or not, that's up to someone with more Wikipedia time than me.
Whether that's been successful for the Giants is up for debate.
Whether the implication is the Giants are antiquated fools or patient calculators, Abrams getting the gig is in line with the trend.
When there is a concern like when you pick a GM in a process that doesn't appear to be very open that you are getting attention in the media that your ways of operating might be dated. You’d think that there would be an effort to manage that perception, demonstrate that you are aware of even potential flaws in how you operate and are willing to do whatever it takes to win. The fact that there is this much talk of Abrams belies a point that they are so far into this way of operating that they don’t care to manage the perception it makes the problem seem bigger.
If they can’t even manage stories and how the team is viewed how can that inspire confidence that they can turn around a franchise and start catching up with the same people at the top that oversaw them falling behind?
There are edge case dissapointment fans who can't be reasoned with or appealed to in every fan base. So like polititicàns,radio shows, movies, TV shows, and sports enterprises...they concentrate on their fans and near fans and ignore the disinterested, disenfranchised and those who they think won't ever get it.
Just like you would ignore girls who seem to ignore you.
Thats just a healthier way to live. Why listen to constant complaining? Nobody does that.
There are no bad stories about him. There are some vague nice words that don't tell us much.
No decision has been made as near as anyone knows.
Sure sounds like a very theoretical problem that only an idle person in the first world could have.
I think all the positives not yet played out or proven out are most attributable to one man- John Mara.
I think all the rest is a coffee klatch discussing a soap opera they made up about characters they don't know before the kids come home from school.
Meanwhile, the game is played on the field by football players. Thats what I try to pay attention to by watching directly.
In your zeal to keep talking about advanced decision making and analytics, you are now trying to stretch EVERYTHING to fit that narrative. Last week, it was the selection of Baker. This week, it is idle chatter around Abrahms.
You continually talk about "managing stories" and inspiring confidence to the fan base. You know how you do that? Not by discussing a potential GM's qualifications. You do it by winning.
You are so dug in on the Giants being stuck in antiquated decision-making that you've completely ignored the last 4 months.
In this thread alone we already have 3 potential named suitors - Abrams, Abrahams and Abrahms.
Yes the Giants have sucked but they just made some big changes, ones that aren't being harped on because they happened already and don't fit the narrative (unless it doesn't work out, you'll be chomping at the bit for that). Hiring Judge and basically letting him change the entire structure of the coaching staff and team philosophy is what you've wanted and now have, so now you are moving on to the next story, one that's completely fabricated I might add.
What do you want on Tuesday, May 26th? A briefing on the actual plan to replace Gettelman?
Also strikes me in an ideal place to see all the mistakes and not repeat them.
Why wouldn't a guy want some respect, some money and avoid dealing with Pat Leonard and Jordan Ranaan and snipers on BBI?
Patterns are Patterns. Guys stays non controversial and behind the scenes and very silent with the press...sure seem s an odd way to campaign for a front piece in the worlds media market.
Feels like a lot of unknowable made up speculation
In this thread alone we already have 3 potential named suitors - Abrams, Abrahams and Abrahms.
You got a chuckle out of me.
I think all the positives not yet played out or proven out are most attributable to one man- John Mara.
In this distant hypothetical; I'm the CEO and directly make the decision on hiring the division Sr. VP.
The last 3 hires had spent time as the direct subordinate to the position. Two of the last three have been fired for cause.
The division of the company has failed to meet it's number in 7 of the 8 last years. An approach that used to work well, is not working now.
Maybe practical assessments I might make:
- there are deeper issues than who fills this SVP seat
- how/who I fill this role is not producing the results I desire
- I might want to rethink following my old playbook with the help of someone independent
Quote:
I think all the mistakes of the past decade are most attributable to one person - John Mara.
I think all the positives not yet played out or proven out are most attributable to one man- John Mara.
In this distant hypothetical; I'm the CEO and directly make the decision on hiring the division Sr. VP.
The last 3 hires had spent time as the direct subordinate to the position. Two of the last three have been fired for cause.
The division of the company has failed to meet it's number in 7 of the 8 last years. An approach that used to work well, is not working now.
Maybe practical assessments I might make:
- there are deeper issues than who fills this SVP seat
- how/who I fill this role is not producing the results I desire
- I might want to rethink following my old playbook with the help of someone independent
Accorsi was fired for cause? Neither Accorsi or Reese had any success?
The Judge hire was a step in the right direction, I've said that. That being said, understanding how the outputs can be useful which i'm sure he does, doesn't mean he knows how to build the technologies or have good input in the right people to hire for those positions.
I'm not twisting any narratives, this article is a well sourced scathing article of our front office.
The Giants follow this pattern of scapegoating be it Reese or Shurmur or TC before that where larger problems are made out to be smaller ones that can be excised. Abrams would be the biggest example of that yet a "numbers geek" who hasn't familiarized himself enough with new tech and methods or fostered innovation well enough to keep up with the trends in his industry. We do not know well what Abrams can do but we know him like the rest of the organization has admitted they didn't do this well and made mistakes. Firing a few scouts doesn't mean you are serious about fixing the problem or have any idea to. It does mean the well deserved heat is on you and you've never had any problems offering up some sacrificial lambs. Your bias or willful ignorance is showing if you don't see how deeply disconcerting it should be to watch other organizations advance their systems while you plummet into the cellar and talk up your assistant GM as the next guy for the job. Is that the behavior of an organization that is really ready for change?
From that article:
This is one of my big worries. Without a tech leader to own the project this could very easily be an initiative that the head coach is excited about but there aren't operators to get it done well. Shurmur was willing to integrate analytics into the game planning but he very clearly was doing it in oversimplified ways without the right people or systems behind him. Now with Judge I don't worry about him being able to sniff out if the systems are sophisticated enough, the problem is, the most challenging part of data science isn't building something that tests well, it's building something that you know will generalize to the problem. And that takes a lot of subject matter expertise and tech savvy.
“My perception of Gettleman is that he really understands certain things from the old-school, ‘real football’ truisms, that he’s pretty good at," Manocherian said. "And there are some things that he seems to want to do his own way. It’s hard to follow.”
I do think there will be internal philosophical differences which is why you want to have a tech leader outside of that process with their own mandate. It's easy for "computer guys" to be torn in a million directions and these are people that mind you are already behind. And if you are a talented engineer would you want to work for a team that has fully bought in for years or a team who has this kind of articles written about them?
Another maybe even more important scenario here is confirmation bias, these systems take time and patience to build. Sometimes a leader needs to be able to say "this isn't ready yet" as opposed to lower level people who are just trying to get something out. Who decides when to try a different method? What's this process like when everyone levels upon levels above you was so skeptical of it in the first place that they fell behind?
Joe Judge has a lot to do on the field, he can't be the person in the building that leads a modernization effort forward day to day. I'm not making this into a bigger deal, it is a big deal already when your organization has fallen so far behind you have articles like this written about you. Look at what the Ravens are doing and how tech has played a role in that. If anyone thinks firing a few scouts and hiring some "computer guys" can catch you up to people with complete commitment and buy in from the top to that I would say the odds are not in your favor.
Kudos.
Christ - you are even going on about not having a "tech leader" on a thread about Abrams future. Meanwhile, your assumptions on the "tech leader" still lie with your opinion that Tyseer Siam is unfit.
How many fucking threads are you going to infiltrate with the same tired message?