Are there people on OH you feel could do a better job than AM or other members of the O's brass?

[Stotle]

The only skillset that is absolutely necessary to run any large company is the ability to identify needs and hire the correct person(s) to fill that need and to make sure they get the resources necessary to successfully get their job done. It's nice to have a working knowledge of as many aspects of a business as you can, but for any large business there are going to be mission critical elements of the business that the CEO (or General Manager in this case) simply know nothing about. The core skill for top management is the ability to identify and hire people with the right skill set, attitude and work ethic to get various jobs done.

You don't have to understand the process of scouting, or the process of setting up a trade or balancing a team budget (although of course it wouldn't hurt to understand them). The GM shouldn't be doing those things - he should have people who are experts at doing each one of them that work for him. It's the GM (or CEOs) job to make decisions based on the expert advice and information provided to him by his minions. If he has the right minions he wins. If he has the wrong minions he gets the Orioles.

A GM doesn't have to know the intimate details of developing arm strength or refining footwork in the infield. He has to understand the basics of scouting and player evaluation. It's at the very core of his primary responsibility. A GM that doesn't understand scouting is like a CFO that doesn't know how to read an annual financial statement.

[bluedog]

For the last time, the question is not "could any poster on here get a job as a GM". The answer to that, for every single person on the board, is no.

I disagree. I have no doubt that there are people on this board who, if they chose to pursue a career path towards baseball GM, could (not would, but could) get a job as a GM. I'm sure there are dozens of Executive level professionals who posts on OH who could get a job in a MLB front office and over time work their ways up in the ranks with the possibility of eventually reaching GM.

I used to work for a division of a Fortune 500 company where the President of my division had started in the mail room only 10 years prior to being chosen to head the division. He had absolutely no advantages - no money, no family influence, no friends at the company prior to his hire, nothing - but he worked through the system on merit and hard work alone to eventually gain a job he had no formal training for - and he built the division into a multi-hundred million dollar business unit.

Theo Epstein started in the PR department of the Padres and we know how that story ended. Sure Epstein had some famous family members, but his father is a novelist. It's not like he had some kind of golden pathway to becoming a MLB GM.

These kinds of success stories are common enough for us to know that anyone can aspire to almost any job and have a realistic chance to succeed given enough hard work and determination.

[bluedog]

A GM doesn't have to know the intimate details of developing arm strength or refining footwork in the infield. He has to understand the basics of scouting and player evaluation. It's at the very core of his primary responsibility. A GM that doesn't understand scouting is like a CFO that doesn't know how to read an annual financial statement.

Billy Beane's resume to become Assistant GM of the A's:

No college degree

6 years as a reserve outfielder

3 years as an advance scout for the As

I find it hard to believe that Beane became an expert in scouting and player evaluation with that background. He might have understood the basic principles of scouting, but its not like he had a foundation similar in any way to the financial background and training that most CFOs of large, successful corporations have.

Theo Epstein has a law degree, started in the PR department with the Padres and took over the Red Sox at 28 years of age with no formal time as either a player or a scout.

The point I'm making is that understanding the basics of scouting and player evaluation (as evidenced in the Beane and Epstein cases) is something that any intelligent person could master in a very limited amount of time given the right teacher or entry level scouting job. Anyone who is competent enough to be considered for the position of GM isn't going to have trouble grasping the basics of any discipline required by the job, even if they have no prior experience with that discipline.

By comparison, a CFO doesn't need to know the "basics of finance" to do their job - they are expected to be an expert and intimately understand finance and all of its principles and have extensive experience with finance.

There is a reason the word "General" is used in the GM's title.

[Dannyboy]

It's easy to say yes by being on the outside looking in. But not knowing all the parameters in which AM has to work with, I'm going to say no.

[Stotle]

Billy Beane's resume to become Assistant GM of the A's:

No college degree

6 years as a reserve outfielder

3 years as an advance scout for the As

I find it hard to believe that Beane became an expert in scouting and player evaluation with that background. He might have understood the basic principles of scouting, but its not like he had a foundation similar in any way to the financial background and training that most CFOs of large, successful corporations have.

Theo Epstein has a law degree, started in the PR department with the Padres and took over the Red Sox at 28 years of age with no formal time as either a player or a scout.

The point I'm making is that understanding the basics of scouting and player evaluation (as evidenced in the Beane and Epstein cases) is something that any intelligent person could master in a very limited amount of time given the right teacher or entry level scouting job.

By comparison, a CFO doesn't need to know the "basics of finance" to do their job - they are expected to be an expert and intimately understand finance and all of its principles and have extensive experience with finance.

There is a reason the word "General" is used in the GM's title.

I don't know how to respond other than to say that you are wrong. Beane was a former player with a scouting background that was also at the forefront of looking for new measures for evaluating players. You act like he knew nothing of player eval and became an expert in three years. That is flat out wrong.

You need to understand eval. That is what you do. You build a ML baseball team. How you can think someone can be suited to build a ML team without an advanced understanding of player evaluation is inconceivable to me. By your explanation I could take the CEO of any F500 company, drop him into the position of GM and he'd be fine. You actually believe that?

[El Gordo]

For the last time, the question is not "could any poster on here get a job as a GM". The answer to that, for every single person on the board, is no.

The question is, "are there posters who would make better decisions and construct and execute a better strategy than the front office."

How is this confusing? You are seriously the most pedantic person in the world.

There may be people with better plans but I doubt there is a soul here who could execute it.

[CA-ORIOLE]

A GM doesn't have to know the intimate details of developing arm strength or refining footwork in the infield. He has to understand the basics of scouting and player evaluation. It's at the very core of his primary responsibility. A GM that doesn't understand scouting is like a CFO that doesn't know how to read an annual financial statement.

I agree with this and I know you're a scout, so don't take this the wrong way. I think scouting is critically important. I've never read Money Ball. But I understand the concept of what Money Ball is saying. Scouting can be a slippery slope. I think a lot of reasons for GM failures is this area. Too much attention to Scouts/GM's who simply place emphasis on the wrong things (i.e. tools versus skills).

[CA-ORIOLE]

It's easy to say yes by being on the outside looking in. But not knowing all the parameters in which AM has to work with, I'm going to say no.

That's a good point. But considering the parameters to be equal, I'd say yes.

[Sports Guy]

I just think some people are underestimating just how many people there are around the GM.

[CA-ORIOLE]

I just think some people are underestimating just how many people there are around the GM.

Like some of others have said, it's the right people. You don't have to be a Bill James, but hiring a Bill James certainly helps. I doubt we have a Bill James in the organization at all. (For El Gordo: I don't mean Bill James literally here, although it doesn't hurt)

[bluedog]

I don't know how to respond other than to say that you are wrong. Beane was a former player with a scouting background that was also at the forefront of looking for new measures for evaluating players. You act like he knew nothing of player eval and became an expert in three years. That is flat out wrong.

You need to understand eval. That is what you do. You build a ML baseball team. How you can think someone can be suited to build a ML team without an advanced understanding of player evaluation is inconceivable to me. By your explanation I could take the CEO of any F500 company, drop him into the position of GM and he'd be fine. You actually believe that?

It happens every day. CEO's routinely move from one industry to another where they have no prior experience and succeed.

And I didn't say anything about Beane becoming an expert in player evaluation in three years. I said he learned the basics of player evaluation in three years and that all he needed to succeed were to understand the basics. Read moneyball. He repeatedly states that his theory of building a baseball team was based on economics and statistical analysis, not scouting as it had been done for decades. Moneyball is basic economic theory, nothing more. Beane didn't become an expert in statistical analysis, he hired one. Beane didn't become an expert in economics, he hired one.

[CA-ORIOLE]

It happens every day. CEO's routinely move from one industry to another where they have no prior experience and succeed.

And I didn't say anything about Beane becoming an expert in player evaluation in three years. I said he learned the basics of player evaluation in three years and that all he needed to succeed were to understand the basics. Read moneyball. He repeatedly states that his theory of building a baseball team was based on economics and statistical analysis, not scouting as it had been done for decades. Moneyball is basic economic theory, nothing more. Beane didn't become an expert in statistical analysis, he hired one. Beane didn't become an expert in economics, he hired one.

I think you've pretty much nailed it in several of your posts. I believe as you do. I'll just add that despite all the experts, data and expert opinions you may have, you're still going to have conflicting opinions and analysis. You have to have some analytical ability to make the right decisions.

[Stotle]

It happens every day. CEO's routinely move from one industry to another where they have no prior experience and succeed.

And I didn't say anything about Beane becoming an expert in player evaluation in three years. I said he learned the basics of player evaluation in three years and that all he needed to succeed were to understand the basics. Read moneyball. He repeatedly states that his theory of building a baseball team was based on economics and statistical analysis, not scouting as it had been done for decades. Moneyball is basic economic theory, nothing more. Beane didn't become an expert in statistical analysis, he hired one. Beane didn't become an expert in economics, he hired one.

I've read moneyball. Friedman is a better example than beane, as far as your argument is concerned. Beane played the game at the professional level. There was a lot more than 3yr worth of training for him on the evaluative side.

Id concede Friedman is a case for someone completely outside coming in and succeeding quickly. I HIGHLY doubt the next Friedman is posting at the hangout, but hey I could be wrong...

[CA-ORIOLE]

Beane played the game at the professional level. Beane played the game at the professional level. There was a lot more than 3yr worth of training for him on the evaluative side.

Maybe. Most baseball players are probably poor player evaluators and would make poor GM's imo. A couple nights listening to MLB tonight and you'll get that pretty clearly. It's the reason most fans are dumb. I'd liken it to a technician and an engineer. A technician may know how. An engineer knows why.

[Stotle]

Maybe. Most baseball players are probably poor player evaluators and would make poor GM's imo. A couple nights listening to MLB tonight and you'll get that pretty clearly. It's the reason most fans are dumb. I'd liken it to a technician and an engineer. A technician may know how. An engineer knows why.

I didn't say being a player makes you a good evaluator. I said it adds to your experience. Two people with the same inherent knack for evaluation, if one has no experience in the game and the other played pro ball, the ballplayer is going to be ahead of the outsider.