MacPhail is keeping mum about his future with the club

[Steve I]

If I were AM, I would run shrieking from the building. As long as PGA owns the O's, they are going to suck. Bottom line. Not sure why, but PGA is the single most snake bit owner in sports. Is it his fault or is he like Guts? Just hard luck. Either way, the O's do not win again until PGA sells.

[El Gordo]

Almost 0% chance that MacPhail is not the GM in 2012. The only way that occurs is if the 2nd half of 2011 is similar to the 1st half of 2010.

Seems like almost 0% chance that it wont be. I expect it could be worse. After we trade Guthrie we won't have any SP, except for Britton before he is shut down, and Arrieta before he goes on the DL with his elbow. I see the worst end of season meltdown of all of them. AM will not accept the offer of a contract renewal if that happens.

[24fps]

He also stated when he took over that the entire system was in a much worse position then he could have imagined. He openly stated that it was going to take time, and I'm almost positive that he said it would be every bit of a five year overhaul. I know we have posters on this board who think they could have flipped the O's into contenders in six months because they traded Felix Pie for Albert Pujols and Chris Carpenter in their fantasy league, but its a bit different when the guy on the other end of the deal isn't some dude living in his mothers basement. I'm not saying I want AM back, nor am I saying I'm satisfied with what he has done. What I am saying, is that he openly told the fans that this was not going to happen over night, and to expect something real after about five years. Feel free to go back to the million quotes he gave when he was hired four years ago.

I don't recall MacPhail ever committing to a specific timetable. I clearly remember many posters, myself included, speculating about how long it would take. Five years was often mentioned but that's not the same as AM saying it, of course. I suppose I could look back to when he was hired, but it seems to me that if you're going to quote him to reinforce your argument, the burden is on you to demonstrate the existence of the quote. For support of my point-of-view, I would look first to the 2009-2010 offseason when phase 1 (or whatever it was actually called at the time) was complete. There I would hope to find some insight as to AM's feelings about progress to that point. It was then that fan (and OH for that matter) sentiment began to change. After two-and-a-half years expectations incrementally began to increase and rightly so.

No doubt MacPhail said it would take a while to effect a turnaround. When he uttered those words (whatever they might have been) time did not stand still, fan expectations did not freeze, and all judgement was not suspended. Almost 90% of the way through his initial contract the team is worse off by the one objective measure that matters to most fans. That is a point worth emphasizing. The nuances matter when analyzing the condition of the team, but I believe we shouldn't get too sophisticated for our own good. Four years is by no means too short a period to form a meaningful opinion of any GM's stewardship and whether he deserves to be extended.

I don't know what Pie for Pujols, dudes in mom's basement and fantasy leagues have to do with anything I said.

[Catch 8]

Because he has said so in the Press about 1,000 times..... Chicago was not his dream job.

Yup. He never ran around in Cubs pajamas.

[GoldGlove21]

I am ok with conservative, but you have to think that Cal will put money into player development, the draft and the international market. I would think that Cal Ripken would get it.

[GoldGlove21]

MacPhail isn't that bad guys. He has made some smart trades and who knows what kind of resources he is working with. There were guys available this year, I didn't hear anyone really pushing for Berkman who is having a great year. We were pushing for Dunn who has been really bad thus far and the White Sox have him for three more years! All I am saying is that being a GM isn't simple when your owner is a guy like Peter Angelos who does have a reputation of handcuffing GM's. How many GM's do we need to have before we realize that the combination of being in the AL East and working for a guy like Angelos is not a winning combination?

Besides, if a guy that Angelos trusts and that guy has a high baseball IQ, then who do we replace him with if he departs? Anyone who thinks we get a top notch GM to come here is nuts IMO, a guy like Cashman would be better off sitting out a season or two than he would be to take this job.

[DrungoHazewood]

MacPhail isn't that bad guys. He has made some smart trades and who knows what kind of resources he is working with. There were guys available this year, I didn't hear anyone really pushing for Berkman who is having a great year. We were pushing for Dunn who has been really bad thus far and the White Sox have him for three more years! All I am saying is that being a GM isn't simple when your owner is a guy like Peter Angelos who does have a reputation of handcuffing GM's. How many GM's do we need to have before we realize that the combination of being in the AL East and working for a guy like Angelos is not a winning combination?

Besides, if a guy that Angelos trusts and that guy has a high baseball IQ, then who do we replace him with if he departs? Anyone who thinks we get a top notch GM to come here is nuts IMO, a guy like Cashman would be better off sitting out a season or two than he would be to take this job.

MacPhail is a competent GM with some good traits and some blind spots, like most other GMs. In some other organizations he'd be seen as a success, some a failure. The issue is that he's in charge of a resource-limited organization in a hypercompetitive division that started with a ton of huge holes and has a peculiar, old-school owner who takes a very long time (if he ever) accepting new-ish realities of how MLB works.

That's a recipe for failure except in extraordinarily lucky circumstances. But replacing MacPhail with 95% of the GMs in the league would repeat that failure.

[Eddie_Ripken]

MacPhail is a competent GM with some good traits and some blind spots, like most other GMs. In some other organizations he'd be seen as a success, some a failure. The issue is that he's in charge of a resource-limited organization in a hypercompetitive division that started with a ton of huge holes and has a peculiar, old-school owner who takes a very long time (if he ever) accepting new-ish realities of how MLB works.

That's a recipe for failure except in extraordinarily lucky circumstances. But replacing MacPhail with 95% of the GMs in the league would repeat that failure.

Very well said.

[JTrea81]

MacPhail is a competent GM with some good traits and some blind spots, like most other GMs. In some other organizations he'd be seen as a success, some a failure. The issue is that he's in charge of a resource-limited organization in a hypercompetitive division that started with a ton of huge holes and has a peculiar, old-school owner who takes a very long time (if he ever) accepting new-ish realities of how MLB works.

That's a recipe for failure except in extraordinarily lucky circumstances. But replacing MacPhail with 95% of the GMs in the league would repeat that failure.

The problem is a lot of the resource limitation comes from the team itself. Getting a replacement that knows how to allocate those resources properly and knows how to get the owner to allocate more resources is the key.

MacPhail is clearly not that guy and there will be candidates this offseason that have experience doing just that.

[Sports Guy]

The problem is a lot of the resource limitation comes from the team itself. Getting a replacement that knows how to allocate those resources properly and knows how to get the owner to allocate more resources is the key.

MacPhail is clearly not that guy and there will be candidates this offseason that have experience doing just that.

I don't understand why you don't get this...PA is the problem..Do you understand that?

There is ZERO evidence that another GM can get him to spend the money you want him to spend...and besides, your plan is awful anyways...All we are going to do is have an expensive, 85-90 win team that likely doesn't make the playoffs and, in a few years, will be in payroll hell.

[El Gordo]

The problem is a lot of the resource limitation comes from the team itself. Getting a replacement that knows how to allocate those resources properly and knows how to get the owner to allocate more resources is the key.

MacPhail is clearly not that guy and there will be candidates this offseason that have experience doing just that.

So your wunderkind GM comes in to interview with PA and tells him he has to get rid of his deadwood cronies in player development, add 10 M to the scouting budget, and pour more money into the DR, as well as open up the market in Tuva. He say we need to trade Markakis, Jones, Roberts, as well as Hardy, Guthrie, Scott, Vlad, Gregg, DLee, etc. We need to continue stock piling SP as well as signing, Fielder and Reyes, and increasing our payroll to $120M. What is PA going to say to that? "Huzzzaah! you're hired"?:rolleyestf:

[Albert56]

Macphail and his entire team have done nothing since he's been here. We are in worse shape than we were before he got here. Maybe we can get someone in here that knows talent and a support staff that can develop talent. I for one will be happy to see him not return. Let him ruin another organization. Give me back my O's and something to root for again. We won't miss him at all.

[24fps]

MacPhail is a competent GM with some good traits and some blind spots, like most other GMs. In some other organizations he'd be seen as a success, some a failure. The issue is that he's in charge of a resource-limited organization in a hypercompetitive division that started with a ton of huge holes and has a peculiar, old-school owner who takes a very long time (if he ever) accepting new-ish realities of how MLB works.

That's a recipe for failure except in extraordinarily lucky circumstances. But replacing MacPhail with 95% of the GMs in the league would repeat that failure.

Shouldn’t AM be held to a more rigorous standard than this?

It’s certainly true that the Orioles exist in a hypercompetitive division and the organization was full of holes when he began. However his record with the Orioles provides no basis that I can see to assume that he would do any better or worse in another organization. The possibilities for speculation here are endless and beside the point, even distracting IMO. As is the assertion that 95% of other GM’s would fare no better in a similar environment. We simply can’t know that, and the performance of other GM’s is not in question anyway. The main thing we do know that isn’t open to interpretation is that the Orioles’ W-L record is worse after four years of his leadership. Shouldn’t this be the conerstone for any discussion about extending him? This is the irritation that prompted my first post in this thread.

As far as PA being a “peculiar, old-school owner who takes a very long time (if ever) accepting new-ish realities of how MLB works” this is a statement I would have no trouble believing. The problem is that it’s hard to identify what impact PA has had on AM’s job performance without inferring. Indeed, the public perception is that PA has not only been hands-off, but admirably hands-off over the last four years. An awkward situation for MacPhail certainly, but no basis for shifting the blame to PA however meddlesome or clueless he might truly be behind the scenes. I’m no defender of PA, but too much has to be assumed here for me to blithely give Andy a pass.

There are many ways to create a recipe for failure. The one that concerns me most at the moment is confusing AM – a competent GM perhaps – with a successful one. I can say with genuine admiration that your post is one of the most beautifully constructed examples of damning with faint praise I have ever encountered.

[JTrea81]

I don't understand why you don't get this...PA is the problem..Do you understand that?

There is ZERO evidence that another GM can get him to spend the money you want him to spend...and besides, your plan is awful anyways...All we are going to do is have an expensive, 85-90 win team that likely doesn't make the playoffs and, in a few years, will be in payroll hell.

There's zero evidence saying that he won't spend now with another GM at the helm. I realize he may set a budget, but it all depends on how badly he wants to win. Having somebody tell him it's all sunshine and rainbows hasn't helped the past 4 years.

He needs somebody (well respected) to give him a harse dose of reality. If he doesn't want that and doesn't want to win at all costs, then I agree we're doomed.

[Sports Guy]

There's zero evidence saying that he won't spend now with another GM at the helm. I realize he may set a budget, but it all depends on how badly he wants to win. Having somebody tell him it's all sunshine and rainbows hasn't helped the past 4 years.

He needs somebody (well respected) to give him a harse dose of reality. If he doesn't want that and doesn't want to win at all costs, then I agree we're doomed.

Has AM been the GM the whole time PA has been the owner?