is sort of like Leonard Williams (at least as long as Sandy is still here) in that the investment has been unfortunately made.
Like or hate PCA he was the top OF prospect in a farm system barren of OF prospects, so he was more valuable to the Mets even if he was 2-3 years away than some other teams.
You don't trade him for Baez and let Baez walk two months later, it's malpractice.
First you miscalculate your team's chances at the post-season knowing your ace was unlikely to pitch again this year, and then second you waste a top 5 prospect on a rental.
firable IMO.
So to save face Baez will be re-signed.
smart people don't make future decisions based on sunk costs.
if the person they hire to be POBO or GM makes a decision based on a sunk cost they are the wrong hire. Full stop. Same if the decision gets made before they make that new hire.
there are reasons for the new POBO/GM to consider resigning Baez like him being a gold glove 2b. And him being one of the best power hitters in baseball. And him being a generally electric player who can impact games in all ways. Because they traded PCA for him is not one of those reasons.
ok
I agree with both of you guys...
Objective/Smart people would not consider PCA in the Baez decision..
But Sandy and the Mets FO might...
if we are strictly talking pedigrees i think my ideal combo would be
POBO with experience in the LAD org (which would basically be Byrnes?)
GM from the TB system (Heck or Bendix?)
get a big picture guy from a big market and a development person with a track record for getting the most out of their resources - both with track records in building consistently strong scouting departments.
Byrnes seemingly has nowhere to go with Friedman above him and if they want to keep Gomes that gives them room for him to ascend. I assume he'd get to hire the GM spot so it might not be realistic that he'd choose someone from Tampa as opposed to someone he's got a prior relationship with and thinks highly of.
worked with Bendix in TB. Don't think you hand pick a GM to work with a POBO. In that situation, a Byrnes picks his own GM. I prefer going another route.
Zaidi/Byrnes and later Anthopoulos were hired by the Dodgers, it was because Friedman picked them. The Mets can't piecemeal this. Your POBO is the guy who should make ALL of the hires with Cohen okaying his moves. You don't say "these are your assistants, this is your GM".
worked with Bendix in TB. Don't think you hand pick a GM to work with a POBO. In that situation, a Byrnes picks his own GM. I prefer going another route.
agreed - if you hire a POBO they hire their GM.
All else equal I'd rather get the guy who worked with Friedman in LA when he had money to spend than the guy who worked with him in Tampa when he didn't.
but obviously all else is not likely equal and you have to pick the most impressive candidate, whoever that is.
100% sticking to my self imposed lack of pessimistic posts but if the Mets do intend to hire a POBO, and have this guy hopefully become the next Stearns, next Friedman, next Neander that guy has to be given the leash to build the organization as he sees fit. I'm not saying he has to (or should) dump successful/intelligent current employees, but I do think he/she should have complete say in who is hired (Cohen obviously makes the final call).
You want the POBO, GM, ASG, scouting director etc all on the same page, not "I've never worked with X, but he's the GM I was given", the Mets model, whatever that ends up being should be that of one voice, one path, a well oiled machine, with Mr. X and Steve Cohen being the driving force.
don't think there is any scenario the Dodgers let both Gomes and Byrnes go together, it's worth asking but Byrnes is essentially their GM, so if he goes, then Gomes slides into that slot.
don't think there is any scenario the Dodgers let both Gomes and Byrnes go together, it's worth asking but Byrnes is essentially their GM, so if he goes, then Gomes slides into that slot.
that's what I said above - and why it might be something that makes sense. If either is ever going to move up Byrnes has to go, which opens up the spot for Gomes.
100% agree that if you give someone the POBO title they pick the GM.
I've noted before there is no hard rule you can't hire more than 1, but it's very unusual and in most cases there is even a hiring moratorium put in place aka if they hired Byrnes they can't hire another LAD FO executive for 1-2 years etc. No harm in asking but in this case, yeah Byrnes would get a promotion to POBO and Gomes likely the Dodgers new GM.
he interviewed with PHI before pulling his name from consideration. He's obviously had interest in the job before but also turned down the Wilpons (can't blame him there). Given how the PHI search turned out it seems like he may have even turned down the job (and not just withdrawn).
RE: I wonder if the Mets interviewed Byrnes last year
he interviewed with PHI before pulling his name from consideration. He's obviously had interest in the job before but also turned down the Wilpons (can't blame him there). Given how the PHI search turned out it seems like he may have even turned down the job (and not just withdrawn).
Thad Levine also interviewed (which surprised many) but he too turned it down.
"Main Strength: Experience in a Brilliant Organization
It’s well-known that the Rays are a powerhouse when it comes to their front office, which is why several teams have started to target their executives. Chaim Bloom and James Click were hired this past offseason by the Red Sox and Astros, respectively, and it’s only a matter of time before Peter Bendix follows in their footsteps. Now that those two executives have departed the organization, Bendix is essentially general manager Erik Neander’s right-hand man, and despite being just 34-years-old, he’s already been in the organization for twelve years. As is the case with most top executives from this organization, he is a super bright mind and is very well-rounded, and, to be honest, how could you not want to hire someone from the Rays? They’ve been ahead of the curve, compared to other teams, for a long time, and based on the success stories from some of the lead executives that come from tree, they do a great job grooming their front-office members to lead their own baseball department. In other words, if you’re looking for the next up-and-coming superstar, Bendix is exactly that."
i know this is obvious but it really sucks that porter didn't work out
he really had a lot of positive attributes. really liked his entire mentality and everything he talked about in terms of building depth throughout the system, leveraging all avenues, etc. And he had a good combo of big market/small market experience.
obviously we know a lot more about his vision for the team than any of the other names who haven't been hired/spoken publicly about the team but on paper he seems very strong compared to the others we are talking about. Byrnes is very impressive on paper too - which makes sense given he'd be interviewing for the real top job. I wonder if last year the Mets were just aiming higher than a first timer for the POBO job?
was a home run (except....), when they brought on Scott it was oft mentioned he didn't really have the gift of gab or personality that most successful GM's have and he seemed like a secondary type. Byrnes strength is draft/development, his teams did not usually win trade or FA and he's known as somewhat surly. I wouldn't "dislike" the hire but his lack of success as a GM in terms of W/L is at least somewhat of a concern to me.
Byrnes reportedly turned down the Phillies job because he didn't want to move his two teenage daughters, now it's a year later but that may still be the case.
I think I saw something credible recently (Martino? maybe) that they still like Scott but I would have bet a lot he's not back a few weeks ago. He was mostly unimpressive last year from the leadership angle.
I really wonder what they do if they find themselves in a position where nobody they speak to seems as good as Porter.
Am I crazy that bringing him back seems not that crazy?
Byrnes reportedly turned down the Phillies job because he didn't want to move his two teenage daughters, now it's a year later but that may still be the case.
I'd call BS on that one. I think he went through multiple rounds of interviews taken knowing he had teenage daughters. I'd think it more likely he didn't like the situation. Or maybe they just wanted to give him a soft landing.
I think I saw something credible recently (Martino? maybe) that they still like Scott but I would have bet a lot he's not back a few weeks ago. He was mostly unimpressive last year from the leadership angle.
I really wonder what they do if they find themselves in a position where nobody they speak to seems as good as Porter.
Am I crazy that bringing him back seems not that crazy?
I'd be absolutely stunned if they brought back Porter. The firestorm would be immense and Cohen seems to be very sensitive for a guy who is as big as he is. Porter was known to (in his off time) drive down to random games or check out indy ball. He was obsessive. He was absolutely a loss. I wouldn't hate Scott returning but he'd have to be in a secondary role, I'm sure he's good at what he does but teams won't be rushing to interview him to be their next GM if the Mets dump him.
i'd also be stunned if they brought him back but that's a different ?
if it was your franchise, and you knew of someone available who you felt was clearly stronger than anyone else you've talked to, and was on track last year to building up the org, do you just forget that?
was what he did a literal career killer?
obviously if there was more that came out behind the scenes after the fact in the baseball world that didn't get printed or if there were any future concerns about his behavior it's a no go. But I haven't seen anything else come out other than that 2016 allegation that he owned up to.
Byrnes reportedly turned down the Phillies job because he didn't want to move his two teenage daughters, now it's a year later but that may still be the case.
I'd call BS on that one. I think he went through multiple rounds of interviews taken knowing he had teenage daughters. I'd think it more likely he didn't like the situation. Or maybe they just wanted to give him a soft landing.
Eric,
I think you'd be wrong there. His ex-coach (who he is very close with) suggested he might turn down the Phillies job before he ever did... because of his daughters (Ed Molush)
Byrnes reportedly turned down the Phillies job because he didn't want to move his two teenage daughters, now it's a year later but that may still be the case.
I'd call BS on that one. I think he went through multiple rounds of interviews taken knowing he had teenage daughters. I'd think it more likely he didn't like the situation. Or maybe they just wanted to give him a soft landing.
Eric,
I think you'd be wrong there. His ex-coach (who he is very close with) suggested he might turn down the Phillies job before he ever did... because of his daughters (Ed Molush)
it's certainly possible but why take the interviews then? just in case it's an offer so good it cant be refused?
Byrnes reportedly turned down the Phillies job because he didn't want to move his two teenage daughters, now it's a year later but that may still be the case.
I'd call BS on that one. I think he went through multiple rounds of interviews taken knowing he had teenage daughters. I'd think it more likely he didn't like the situation. Or maybe they just wanted to give him a soft landing.
Thad Levine also met with them regarding the job and NOBODY thought he was leaving and he didn't. Byrnes refused to even interview with the Mets last time around. He's from DC but he's out west most of his professional career. Rockies, Padres, Arizona, Dodgers and in California for the last 11.
Byrnes reportedly turned down the Phillies job because he didn't want to move his two teenage daughters, now it's a year later but that may still be the case.
I'd call BS on that one. I think he went through multiple rounds of interviews taken knowing he had teenage daughters. I'd think it more likely he didn't like the situation. Or maybe they just wanted to give him a soft landing.
Didn't Beane just give the same reason?
Family is important.
If I was already rich I wouldn't subject my family to Philadelphia either...
sure part of it is keeping your name "alive" in discussion for future jobs. It's been long rumored that more than one ex-GM trades information to have his name floated by some of the national writers. Doug Melvin has been suggested as this guy before but I have no evidence of this, could be just a running joke (that it's Melvin).
Byrnes turned down the Wilponzis after they passed on him in 2010
and yes, Beane has turned down probably 100 interviews because of his family over the years. but he's always been completely transparent about that and he even turned down the offer too good to refuse from Henry.
I don't think Beane ever went through an interview process only to later pull out because of his family. That's exactly why he claimed to take himself out of consideration a few days ago. Why waste the time if you know you're not moving your family?
why did Thad Levine? It's not that unheard of for guys to take interviews without the likelihood of taking the job.
"On Friday morning, Joel Sherman of the New York Post reported that Minnesota Twins general manager Thad Levine is “a significant player” in the Phillies’ search for a new president of baseball operations. LaVelle E. Neal III, who covers the Twins for the Star Tribune, later confirmed his candidacy for the job. "
and then
"Since Levine arrived in Minnesota in 2016, the Twins have made the playoffs three times and won two division titles with a mix of homegrown talent and veteran free-agent acquisitions. They have yet to snap their playoff losing streak, which dates back to 2004. It appears Levine prefers to keep his family in the Minneapolis area and work under Twins president of baseball operations Derek Falvey to rid the organization of its postseason futility. "
1. they didn't get the job and were afforded soft landings.
2. they were offered the jobs but both turned it down because the situation was right for them but didn't want to say so.
#2 is the same allegation that was made re: Beane/Mets for the last couple days. only difference being Beane's track record of not engaging due to his family is long established - which imo is more credible since I don't think he's even taken an interview since turning down Henry.
the dombrowski hiring was out of left field enough that I could see it having been either bc the Phillies abruptly changed course thinking they didn't have the right guy or the right guys turned them down.
no point even debating this topic, Byrnes may or may not be asked to interview, he may or may not be offered the job and he may or may not be willing to move his daughters.
1. they didn't get the job and were afforded soft landings.
2. they were offered the jobs but both turned it down because the situation was right for them but didn't want to say so.
#2 is the same allegation that was made re: Beane/Mets for the last couple days. only difference being Beane's track record of not engaging due to his family is long established - which imo is more credible since I don't think he's even taken an interview since turning down Henry.
the dombrowski hiring was out of left field enough that I could see it having been either bc the Phillies abruptly changed course thinking they didn't have the right guy or the right guys turned them down.
#1 doesn't seem plausible. Teams want to look bad as they are rejected for jobs? You think the Mets would agree to look "bad" if Byrnes interviewed with them, they opt against him and he comes away stating they offered it but he said no? In Levine's case it defies reason. He guy is considered an absolute STUD. He and Falvey are 2 of the most highly regarded execs in the game and unlike Byrnes have zero "stink" of failure yet (fairly or not).
no point even debating this topic, Byrnes may or may not be asked to interview, he may or may not be offered the job and he may or may not be willing to move his daughters.
there's nothing to debate it's just speculation. its a little weird of anyone to interview for a job they intend to withdraw themselves from for a reason that was known ahead of time. that doesn't mean it doesn't happen just that there's usually something else beyond the surface - that's where the whole "so and so resigns to spend more time with family" meme comes from.
the "lolmets" stories going around right now, there is no way Steve Cohen is going to allow a candidate to "I turned down the Mets" after they opted not to offer them the job. None.
no point even debating this topic, Byrnes may or may not be asked to interview, he may or may not be offered the job and he may or may not be willing to move his daughters.
there's nothing to debate it's just speculation. its a little weird of anyone to interview for a job they intend to withdraw themselves from for a reason that was known ahead of time. that doesn't mean it doesn't happen just that there's usually something else beyond the surface - that's where the whole "so and so resigns to spend more time with family" meme comes from.
If the Mets somehow landed Thad Levine baseball media would be going wild with praise with such a move. There is "no" chance the Phillies told him no and he framed it like he did. More likely, he didn't see the downside of listening.
1. they didn't get the job and were afforded soft landings.
2. they were offered the jobs but both turned it down because the situation was right for them but didn't want to say so.
#2 is the same allegation that was made re: Beane/Mets for the last couple days. only difference being Beane's track record of not engaging due to his family is long established - which imo is more credible since I don't think he's even taken an interview since turning down Henry.
the dombrowski hiring was out of left field enough that I could see it having been either bc the Phillies abruptly changed course thinking they didn't have the right guy or the right guys turned them down.
#1 doesn't seem plausible. Teams want to look bad as they are rejected for jobs? You think the Mets would agree to look "bad" if Byrnes interviewed with them, they opt against him and he comes away stating they offered it but he said no? In Levine's case it defies reason. He guy is considered an absolute STUD. He and Falvey are 2 of the most highly regarded execs in the game and unlike Byrnes have zero "stink" of failure yet (fairly or not).
i agree. if i was choosing which was more plausible it would be door #2. I don't think anyone else was banging down dombrowski's doors and it was a weird hire from the moment it was announced. the mets hiring Melvin would be comparably weird - and im pretty sure I know what we'd all hypothesize right away. that we couldn't get anyone better to say yes.
don't doubt Doug Melvin knows a hell of a lot more about baseball than I ever will but when you see a guys name like his floated for a premiere job (The Mets) when he hasn't even had a full-time gig in 7 seasons... you know it's almost certainly false. I appreciated Joel Sherman tracking him down to ask. I don't even think that Dorian Boyland rumor was eve remotely true. If it had any basis in reality it was likely Cohen and Boyland having business discussions unrelated to the Mets.
don't doubt Doug Melvin knows a hell of a lot more about baseball than I ever will but when you see a guys name like his floated for a premiere job (The Mets) when he hasn't even had a full-time gig in 7 seasons... you know it's almost certainly false. I appreciated Joel Sherman tracking him down to ask. I don't even think that Dorian Boyland rumor was eve remotely true. If it had any basis in reality it was likely Cohen and Boyland having business discussions unrelated to the Mets.
I should say, unrelated to working FOR the Mets. I have no clue what kind of business, sponsorship or even Willets Point (which Cohen owns 5%) discussions may have been had.
pretend it's early December and the mets are known to interview Thad/Byrnes/etc, some for multiple rounds.
and they hire a retread like Melvin while the others bow out due to family.
what would we think happened?
In that scenario, yes, we'd assume the Mets job is an awful one that nobody wants. Even that scenario, to not hire a "desperate" guy looking for his first shot and going with Melvin... yeesh. They would be better off (optics wise) hiring 4th in command from the Padres and hyping them up as some big time get.
pretend it's early December and the mets are known to interview Thad/Byrnes/etc, some for multiple rounds.
and they hire a retread like Melvin while the others bow out due to family.
what would we think happened?
In that scenario, yes, we'd assume the Mets job is an awful one that nobody wants. Even that scenario, to not hire a "desperate" guy looking for his first shot and going with Melvin... yeesh. They would be better off (optics wise) hiring 4th in command from the Padres and hyping them up as some big time get.
if that's how things played out I'd be on the phone with Porter and the PR team brainstorming anti cancel culture talking points so fast he wouldn't even have time to zip up.
read and I think would be particularly interesting to PJ who has concerns about a small market guy suddenly being expected to "spend". Great piece Link - ( New Window )
read and I think would be particularly interesting to PJ who has concerns about a small market guy suddenly being expected to "spend". Great piece Link - ( New Window )
Nice article.
Beyond the finance-style of looking at player value, one of the reasons you have to want someone from the TB well is summed up here:
Quote:
a key difference between the Rays and the Sox. One of the ways the Rays have been able to separate themselves is in development and implementation. The Sox and Rays can both see similar possibilities for improvement in players, with similar evaluation tools. But Tampa Bay is still probably better equipped to help players produce those changes quickly, a Sox source said.
read and I think would be particularly interesting to PJ who has concerns about a small market guy suddenly being expected to "spend". Great piece Link - ( New Window )
Nice article.
Beyond the finance-style of looking at player value, one of the reasons you have to want someone from the TB well is summed up here:
Quote:
a key difference between the Rays and the Sox. One of the ways the Rays have been able to separate themselves is in development and implementation. The Sox and Rays can both see similar possibilities for improvement in players, with similar evaluation tools. But Tampa Bay is still probably better equipped to help players produce those changes quickly, a Sox source said.
I read this earlier and I liked it, still think trading Mookie Betts was the wrong move. The Dodgers already won a WS with Betts. Isn't that the goal?
And not sure I understand your point JB.
You can look at it that way if you want, but since 2004 the Red Sox have made it the ALCS 6 times and won 4 World Series titles (still alive in 2021 to possibly make it 5). All 4 WS titles and 5 of 6 ALCS appearances in Boston were without anyone from the Rays FO.
In that same time frame the Rays have made it to the ALCS twice and won zero World Series.
So how exactly are you defining success? solely by doing it with less?
Are you (or others) suggesting that when an executive leaves Tampa they bring that model with them to big market/big payroll cities? Are Bloom in BOS and Friedman in LA doing the same thing? Dodgers have exceeded the LT and been #1 in payroll for a few years (and have taken on bad contracts).
If I'm the Mets, the Dodgers or old Boston or the Yankees is how I'd hope things are run, not like Tampa or Oakland.
I think the biggest allure to a Rays hire is introducing their processes for player development.
The Mets have had some good players come up out of the system, but when was the last time we called up a plus reliever? Rays are always around the top of the league in Relief Pitcher WAR. Developing better home-grown bullpen guys would allow us flex our financial muscles on the less fungible positions.
when the cheating scandal broke the teams impacted had to scramble and boy did the Astros end up making a good decision with Dusty. All he's ever done is win and have people like him. Hard to not think the last 2 years wouldn't have been very different had the Mets hired Dusty over Rojas. 6 of the last 7 full years he's managed he's won 90+ games and that's across 3 different franchises.
Andy Martino @martinonyc
50m
Mets search for a new GM is trying to go underground but -- after some regrouping post-Beane -- is ongoing. They're doing diligence on and in some cases almost certainly speaking to young execs around the league.
From 2 days ago:
Quote:
Andy Martino @martinonyc
2d
The Mets don’t need a president of baseball operations. They made a mistake by saying they were looking for one.
I guess not a huge surprise if true because that's how it went last year when they couldn't get necessary permissions. If you think about the 2nd tier "experienced" candidates out there like Melvin/Sabean, I'd probably rather not bring either of them in as POBO to hire a GM. Just don't see much of an upgrade vs. Sandy and possibly a downgrade adding in another layer. If there's no POBO i'd think the opportunity is more attractive to a top tier young GM who sees the upside of having room to grow (like Porter was on track to last year).
It doesn't sound definite so maybe there are candidates like Byrnes/Levine who could still get the POBO title.
I'd imagine we won't hear much until after the WS but would think they want to have someone locked in by then.
Michael Mayer
@mikemayer22
·
1m
I haven't heard yet that the Mets have interest in Brian Sabean, despite him clearly having interest in joining the Mets front office.
Quote:
In comment 15423936 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
is sort of like Leonard Williams (at least as long as Sandy is still here) in that the investment has been unfortunately made.
Like or hate PCA he was the top OF prospect in a farm system barren of OF prospects, so he was more valuable to the Mets even if he was 2-3 years away than some other teams.
You don't trade him for Baez and let Baez walk two months later, it's malpractice.
First you miscalculate your team's chances at the post-season knowing your ace was unlikely to pitch again this year, and then second you waste a top 5 prospect on a rental.
firable IMO.
So to save face Baez will be re-signed.
smart people don't make future decisions based on sunk costs.
if the person they hire to be POBO or GM makes a decision based on a sunk cost they are the wrong hire. Full stop. Same if the decision gets made before they make that new hire.
there are reasons for the new POBO/GM to consider resigning Baez like him being a gold glove 2b. And him being one of the best power hitters in baseball. And him being a generally electric player who can impact games in all ways. Because they traded PCA for him is not one of those reasons.
ok
I agree with both of you guys...
Objective/Smart people would not consider PCA in the Baez decision..
But Sandy and the Mets FO might...
GM from the TB system (Heck or Bendix?)
get a big picture guy from a big market and a development person with a track record for getting the most out of their resources - both with track records in building consistently strong scouting departments.
Byrnes seemingly has nowhere to go with Friedman above him and if they want to keep Gomes that gives them room for him to ascend. I assume he'd get to hire the GM spot so it might not be realistic that he'd choose someone from Tampa as opposed to someone he's got a prior relationship with and thinks highly of.
agreed - if you hire a POBO they hire their GM.
All else equal I'd rather get the guy who worked with Friedman in LA when he had money to spend than the guy who worked with him in Tampa when he didn't.
but obviously all else is not likely equal and you have to pick the most impressive candidate, whoever that is.
You want the POBO, GM, ASG, scouting director etc all on the same page, not "I've never worked with X, but he's the GM I was given", the Mets model, whatever that ends up being should be that of one voice, one path, a well oiled machine, with Mr. X and Steve Cohen being the driving force.
that's what I said above - and why it might be something that makes sense. If either is ever going to move up Byrnes has to go, which opens up the spot for Gomes.
100% agree that if you give someone the POBO title they pick the GM.
Thad Levine also interviewed (which surprised many) but he too turned it down.
It’s well-known that the Rays are a powerhouse when it comes to their front office, which is why several teams have started to target their executives. Chaim Bloom and James Click were hired this past offseason by the Red Sox and Astros, respectively, and it’s only a matter of time before Peter Bendix follows in their footsteps. Now that those two executives have departed the organization, Bendix is essentially general manager Erik Neander’s right-hand man, and despite being just 34-years-old, he’s already been in the organization for twelve years. As is the case with most top executives from this organization, he is a super bright mind and is very well-rounded, and, to be honest, how could you not want to hire someone from the Rays? They’ve been ahead of the curve, compared to other teams, for a long time, and based on the success stories from some of the lead executives that come from tree, they do a great job grooming their front-office members to lead their own baseball department. In other words, if you’re looking for the next up-and-coming superstar, Bendix is exactly that."
obviously we know a lot more about his vision for the team than any of the other names who haven't been hired/spoken publicly about the team but on paper he seems very strong compared to the others we are talking about. Byrnes is very impressive on paper too - which makes sense given he'd be interviewing for the real top job. I wonder if last year the Mets were just aiming higher than a first timer for the POBO job?
I really wonder what they do if they find themselves in a position where nobody they speak to seems as good as Porter.
Am I crazy that bringing him back seems not that crazy?
I'd call BS on that one. I think he went through multiple rounds of interviews taken knowing he had teenage daughters. I'd think it more likely he didn't like the situation. Or maybe they just wanted to give him a soft landing.
I really wonder what they do if they find themselves in a position where nobody they speak to seems as good as Porter.
Am I crazy that bringing him back seems not that crazy?
I'd be absolutely stunned if they brought back Porter. The firestorm would be immense and Cohen seems to be very sensitive for a guy who is as big as he is. Porter was known to (in his off time) drive down to random games or check out indy ball. He was obsessive. He was absolutely a loss. I wouldn't hate Scott returning but he'd have to be in a secondary role, I'm sure he's good at what he does but teams won't be rushing to interview him to be their next GM if the Mets dump him.
was what he did a literal career killer?
obviously if there was more that came out behind the scenes after the fact in the baseball world that didn't get printed or if there were any future concerns about his behavior it's a no go. But I haven't seen anything else come out other than that 2016 allegation that he owned up to.
Quote:
Byrnes reportedly turned down the Phillies job because he didn't want to move his two teenage daughters, now it's a year later but that may still be the case.
I'd call BS on that one. I think he went through multiple rounds of interviews taken knowing he had teenage daughters. I'd think it more likely he didn't like the situation. Or maybe they just wanted to give him a soft landing.
Eric,
I think you'd be wrong there. His ex-coach (who he is very close with) suggested he might turn down the Phillies job before he ever did... because of his daughters (Ed Molush)
Quote:
In comment 15424160 DanMetroMan said:
Quote:
Byrnes reportedly turned down the Phillies job because he didn't want to move his two teenage daughters, now it's a year later but that may still be the case.
I'd call BS on that one. I think he went through multiple rounds of interviews taken knowing he had teenage daughters. I'd think it more likely he didn't like the situation. Or maybe they just wanted to give him a soft landing.
Eric,
I think you'd be wrong there. His ex-coach (who he is very close with) suggested he might turn down the Phillies job before he ever did... because of his daughters (Ed Molush)
it's certainly possible but why take the interviews then? just in case it's an offer so good it cant be refused?
Quote:
Byrnes reportedly turned down the Phillies job because he didn't want to move his two teenage daughters, now it's a year later but that may still be the case.
I'd call BS on that one. I think he went through multiple rounds of interviews taken knowing he had teenage daughters. I'd think it more likely he didn't like the situation. Or maybe they just wanted to give him a soft landing.
Thad Levine also met with them regarding the job and NOBODY thought he was leaving and he didn't. Byrnes refused to even interview with the Mets last time around. He's from DC but he's out west most of his professional career. Rockies, Padres, Arizona, Dodgers and in California for the last 11.
Quote:
Byrnes reportedly turned down the Phillies job because he didn't want to move his two teenage daughters, now it's a year later but that may still be the case.
I'd call BS on that one. I think he went through multiple rounds of interviews taken knowing he had teenage daughters. I'd think it more likely he didn't like the situation. Or maybe they just wanted to give him a soft landing.
Didn't Beane just give the same reason?
Family is important.
If I was already rich I wouldn't subject my family to Philadelphia either...
and yes, Beane has turned down probably 100 interviews because of his family over the years. but he's always been completely transparent about that and he even turned down the offer too good to refuse from Henry.
I don't think Beane ever went through an interview process only to later pull out because of his family. That's exactly why he claimed to take himself out of consideration a few days ago. Why waste the time if you know you're not moving your family?
"On Friday morning, Joel Sherman of the New York Post reported that Minnesota Twins general manager Thad Levine is “a significant player” in the Phillies’ search for a new president of baseball operations. LaVelle E. Neal III, who covers the Twins for the Star Tribune, later confirmed his candidacy for the job. "
and then
"Since Levine arrived in Minnesota in 2016, the Twins have made the playoffs three times and won two division titles with a mix of homegrown talent and veteran free-agent acquisitions. They have yet to snap their playoff losing streak, which dates back to 2004. It appears Levine prefers to keep his family in the Minneapolis area and work under Twins president of baseball operations Derek Falvey to rid the organization of its postseason futility. "
2. they were offered the jobs but both turned it down because the situation was right for them but didn't want to say so.
#2 is the same allegation that was made re: Beane/Mets for the last couple days. only difference being Beane's track record of not engaging due to his family is long established - which imo is more credible since I don't think he's even taken an interview since turning down Henry.
the dombrowski hiring was out of left field enough that I could see it having been either bc the Phillies abruptly changed course thinking they didn't have the right guy or the right guys turned them down.
2. they were offered the jobs but both turned it down because the situation was right for them but didn't want to say so.
#2 is the same allegation that was made re: Beane/Mets for the last couple days. only difference being Beane's track record of not engaging due to his family is long established - which imo is more credible since I don't think he's even taken an interview since turning down Henry.
the dombrowski hiring was out of left field enough that I could see it having been either bc the Phillies abruptly changed course thinking they didn't have the right guy or the right guys turned them down.
#1 doesn't seem plausible. Teams want to look bad as they are rejected for jobs? You think the Mets would agree to look "bad" if Byrnes interviewed with them, they opt against him and he comes away stating they offered it but he said no? In Levine's case it defies reason. He guy is considered an absolute STUD. He and Falvey are 2 of the most highly regarded execs in the game and unlike Byrnes have zero "stink" of failure yet (fairly or not).
there's nothing to debate it's just speculation. its a little weird of anyone to interview for a job they intend to withdraw themselves from for a reason that was known ahead of time. that doesn't mean it doesn't happen just that there's usually something else beyond the surface - that's where the whole "so and so resigns to spend more time with family" meme comes from.
Quote:
no point even debating this topic, Byrnes may or may not be asked to interview, he may or may not be offered the job and he may or may not be willing to move his daughters.
there's nothing to debate it's just speculation. its a little weird of anyone to interview for a job they intend to withdraw themselves from for a reason that was known ahead of time. that doesn't mean it doesn't happen just that there's usually something else beyond the surface - that's where the whole "so and so resigns to spend more time with family" meme comes from.
If the Mets somehow landed Thad Levine baseball media would be going wild with praise with such a move. There is "no" chance the Phillies told him no and he framed it like he did. More likely, he didn't see the downside of listening.
Quote:
1. they didn't get the job and were afforded soft landings.
2. they were offered the jobs but both turned it down because the situation was right for them but didn't want to say so.
#2 is the same allegation that was made re: Beane/Mets for the last couple days. only difference being Beane's track record of not engaging due to his family is long established - which imo is more credible since I don't think he's even taken an interview since turning down Henry.
the dombrowski hiring was out of left field enough that I could see it having been either bc the Phillies abruptly changed course thinking they didn't have the right guy or the right guys turned them down.
#1 doesn't seem plausible. Teams want to look bad as they are rejected for jobs? You think the Mets would agree to look "bad" if Byrnes interviewed with them, they opt against him and he comes away stating they offered it but he said no? In Levine's case it defies reason. He guy is considered an absolute STUD. He and Falvey are 2 of the most highly regarded execs in the game and unlike Byrnes have zero "stink" of failure yet (fairly or not).
i agree. if i was choosing which was more plausible it would be door #2. I don't think anyone else was banging down dombrowski's doors and it was a weird hire from the moment it was announced. the mets hiring Melvin would be comparably weird - and im pretty sure I know what we'd all hypothesize right away. that we couldn't get anyone better to say yes.
and they hire a retread like Melvin while the others bow out due to family.
what would we think happened?
I should say, unrelated to working FOR the Mets. I have no clue what kind of business, sponsorship or even Willets Point (which Cohen owns 5%) discussions may have been had.
and they hire a retread like Melvin while the others bow out due to family.
what would we think happened?
In that scenario, yes, we'd assume the Mets job is an awful one that nobody wants. Even that scenario, to not hire a "desperate" guy looking for his first shot and going with Melvin... yeesh. They would be better off (optics wise) hiring 4th in command from the Padres and hyping them up as some big time get.
Quote:
pretend it's early December and the mets are known to interview Thad/Byrnes/etc, some for multiple rounds.
and they hire a retread like Melvin while the others bow out due to family.
what would we think happened?
In that scenario, yes, we'd assume the Mets job is an awful one that nobody wants. Even that scenario, to not hire a "desperate" guy looking for his first shot and going with Melvin... yeesh. They would be better off (optics wise) hiring 4th in command from the Padres and hyping them up as some big time get.
if that's how things played out I'd be on the phone with Porter and the PR team brainstorming anti cancel culture talking points so fast he wouldn't even have time to zip up.
Already probably behind the 8-ball.
Link - ( New Window )
Nice article.
Beyond the finance-style of looking at player value, one of the reasons you have to want someone from the TB well is summed up here:
Quote:
read and I think would be particularly interesting to PJ who has concerns about a small market guy suddenly being expected to "spend". Great piece Link - ( New Window )
Nice article.
Beyond the finance-style of looking at player value, one of the reasons you have to want someone from the TB well is summed up here:
Quote:
a key difference between the Rays and the Sox. One of the ways the Rays have been able to separate themselves is in development and implementation. The Sox and Rays can both see similar possibilities for improvement in players, with similar evaluation tools. But Tampa Bay is still probably better equipped to help players produce those changes quickly, a Sox source said.
I read this earlier and I liked it, still think trading Mookie Betts was the wrong move. The Dodgers already won a WS with Betts. Isn't that the goal?
And not sure I understand your point JB.
You can look at it that way if you want, but since 2004 the Red Sox have made it the ALCS 6 times and won 4 World Series titles (still alive in 2021 to possibly make it 5). All 4 WS titles and 5 of 6 ALCS appearances in Boston were without anyone from the Rays FO.
In that same time frame the Rays have made it to the ALCS twice and won zero World Series.
So how exactly are you defining success? solely by doing it with less?
Are you (or others) suggesting that when an executive leaves Tampa they bring that model with them to big market/big payroll cities? Are Bloom in BOS and Friedman in LA doing the same thing? Dodgers have exceeded the LT and been #1 in payroll for a few years (and have taken on bad contracts).
If I'm the Mets, the Dodgers or old Boston or the Yankees is how I'd hope things are run, not like Tampa or Oakland.
And not sure I understand your point JB.
I think the biggest allure to a Rays hire is introducing their processes for player development.
The Mets have had some good players come up out of the system, but when was the last time we called up a plus reliever? Rays are always around the top of the league in Relief Pitcher WAR. Developing better home-grown bullpen guys would allow us flex our financial muscles on the less fungible positions.
Brian Sabean interest - ( New Window )
Hard to find anyone that isn't somewhat painful to root for of the remaining teams but I'd be really happy to see Dusty win one.
@MLBNetwork Is there a better interview in baseball? - ( New Window )
50m
Mets search for a new GM is trying to go underground but -- after some regrouping post-Beane -- is ongoing. They're doing diligence on and in some cases almost certainly speaking to young execs around the league.
From 2 days ago:
2d
The Mets don’t need a president of baseball operations. They made a mistake by saying they were looking for one.
I guess not a huge surprise if true because that's how it went last year when they couldn't get necessary permissions. If you think about the 2nd tier "experienced" candidates out there like Melvin/Sabean, I'd probably rather not bring either of them in as POBO to hire a GM. Just don't see much of an upgrade vs. Sandy and possibly a downgrade adding in another layer. If there's no POBO i'd think the opportunity is more attractive to a top tier young GM who sees the upside of having room to grow (like Porter was on track to last year).
It doesn't sound definite so maybe there are candidates like Byrnes/Levine who could still get the POBO title.
I'd imagine we won't hear much until after the WS but would think they want to have someone locked in by then.
@mikemayer22
·
1m
I haven't heard yet that the Mets have interest in Brian Sabean, despite him clearly having interest in joining the Mets front office.