I want a younger GM

[Pedro Cerrano]

There is one older GM I would be in favor of...John Shuerholz.

Other than that, give me the younger GM...They are just more advanced at this point in the way things work now than the older GMs.

Ageist!!!!

[Pedro Cerrano]

What on Earth does your question about cars have to do with the subject at hand?

I'm in the television and motion picture post-production business in LA, and I regularly see a lot of solid 50 & 60 year old pros getting clobbered by age discrimination. The people I'm referring to - the ones who are relevant to this conversation - are every bit as energetic and facile with software and technology as people half their age, in many cases more so because of the lessons of experience. They've changed professional paradigms not once, but twice - from film to linear videotape and finally to computer-based post that requires a good 10 hours a week of continuing education for the freelancers. Adaptability is a learned skill - not a function of age, but of intelligence and these people have it in spades.

Are there parallels to this example in the MLB executive suites? Of course there are, because ill-informed stereotyping, be it about race, or gender or age applies equally to all aspects of life. The history of baseball has a wonderful cautionary tale about the pitfalls of the road you wish to travel.

Just Google "Al Campanis" and "Nightline" and substitute ageism for racism and see if this is a philosophy you really want to be associated with.

Well there are at least 9 people on Earth that disagree with this assertion. They work in DC and wear long black robes.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Well there are at least 9 people on Earth that disagree with this assertion. They work in DC and wear long black robes.

What are you talking about?

[Sports Guy]

Ageist!!!!

That's fine...I don't mind that label.

The reasons I would want a younger GM are basically proven facts.

[Pedro Cerrano]

What are you talking about?

I got from his post that "stereotyping" is equally bad amongst different classifications: race, gender, age etc. The Supreme Court, when deciding whether a law or regulation is "racist" or "ageist" or "sexist" evaluates those laws differently based on the class of people it's allegedly discriminating against. For example, a law that prohibits african americans from obtaining a driver's license would be held to a much stricter standard than one that prohibits someone over the age of 60 from obtaining one (although obviously in this example both laws would be held unconstitutional).

Of course, there's a chance I mis-interpreted what he is saying in which case the above paragraph can be ignored.

[24fps]

Well there are at least 9 people on Earth that disagree with this assertion. They work in DC and wear long black robes.

Presumably you agree to my assertion then, otherwise there would be 10.

Let me frame my point differently then, because it looks like I wasn't sufficiently clear. Exactly what is it about being 55 or 65 or perhaps even older that automatically disqualifies a GM candidate compared to one say 40 or younger based solely on age, other skills and other factors excluded from consideration? In the course of stating a preference, you're suggesting that there are aspects of the aging process that are both universal and insurmountable and furthermore constitute an adequate basis for discrimination. What are these aspects?

[Sports Guy]

Presumably you agree to my assertion then, otherwise there would be 10.

Let me frame my point differently then, because it looks like I wasn't sufficiently clear. Exactly what is it about being 55 or 65 or perhaps even older that automatically disqualifies a GM candidate compared to one say 40 or younger based solely on age, other skills and other factors excluded from consideration? In the course of stating a preference, you're suggesting that there are aspects of the aging process that are both universal and insurmountable and furthermore constitute an adequate basis for discrimination. What are these aspects?

How many of the older GMs are well into the international market? How many of the older GMs put a lot of emphasis in the "new school" stats? How many of the older GMs play the compensation pick game?

[24fps]

How many of the older GMs are well into the international market? How many of the older GMs put a lot of emphasis in the "new school" stats? How many of the older GMs play the compensation pick game?

Beats the heck out of me. Are you claiming you know in any verifiable way?

Age does not exclude adaptability. Lack of intelligence does and older people don't have the market cornered in that regard.

[Sports Guy]

Beats the heck out of me. Are you claiming you know in any verifiable way?

Well, first of all, I guess we need to identify who the older GMs are anymore.

Wade, AM and Hendry come to mind...and they seem to fail in the aspects I am talking about. Coincidence that there teams are also 3 of the worst in the sport and are woefully behind most of the league?

Not a lot of the older GMs in the game anymore...It has gone to the newer and younger guys.

[Pedro Cerrano]

Presumably you agree to my assertion then, otherwise there would be 10.

Let me frame my point differently then, because it looks like I wasn't sufficiently clear. Exactly what is it about being 55 or 65 or perhaps even older that automatically disqualifies a GM candidate compared to one say 40 or younger based solely on age, other skills and other factors excluded from consideration? In the course of stating a preference, you're suggesting that there are aspects of the aging process that are both universal and insurmountable and furthermore constitute an adequate basis for discrimination. What are these aspects?

Oh nothing that automatically disqualifies them. It's just, IN MY OPINION, that the younger GMs are more aggressive. They don't sit idly by. They get things done. If there were an older GM that fit that mold, sign me up, but it appears you have a much better shot at getting that from the younger group (and by young I mean really like sub 50). There's also the inherent bias that I (and probably a lot) of Orioles' fans have based on our past GMs having all been older, not all that wise, and seemingly out of touch.

I'm really not trying to turn this into a Pedro v. AARP thing, if you want to characterize my stance as being "ageist" and therefore makes me akin to a racist, that's your business.

Edit: For the record, my mother is 61 and would easily be the worst MLB GM in history. And yet, I love her with all my heart.

[twoBshorty]

Because I am a huge dork with too much time on my hands, I looked up birthdates for all 30 GMs and sorted them. Here are the groupings:

60 and over: Sandy Alderson (63), Walt Jocketty (60), Jack Zduriencik (60)

55-59: Andy MacPhail (58), Jim Hendry (56), Ned Colletti (56), Ed Wade (55), Brian Sabean (55), Dave Dombrowski (55),

50-54: Frank Wren (53), Bill Smith (53), Dan O'Dowd (51), Doug Melvin (51), Mike Rizzo (50)

45-49: Kevin Towers (49), Billy Beane (49), Kenny Williams (47), Ruben Amaro (46)

40-44: Dayton Moore (44), Tony Reagins (44), Brian Cashman (44), Neal Huntington (42), John Mozeliak (42), Michael Hill (40)

Under 40: Jed Hoyer (37), Theo Epstein (37), Chris Antonetti (36), Andrew Friedman (34), Alex Anthopoulos (34), Jon Daniels (33)

So AM is the 4th oldest. There are some good ones sprinkled throughout, but I would definitely say the better ones are clustered at the younger end.

[24fps]

Oh nothing that automatically disqualifies them. It's just, IN MY OPINION, that the younger GMs are more aggressive. They don't sit idly by. They get things done. If there were an older GM that fit that mold, sign me up, but it appears you have a much better shot at getting that from the younger group (and by young I mean really like sub 50). There's also the inherent bias that I (and probably a lot) of Orioles' fans have based on our past GMs having all been older, not all that wise, and seemingly out of touch.

I'm really not trying to turn this into a Pedro v. AARP thing, if you want to characterize my stance as being "ageist" and therefore makes me akin to a racist, that's your business.

Edit: For the record, my mother is 61 and would easily be the worst MLB GM in history. And yet, I love her with all my heart.

Your stance speaks well enough for itself.

So aggressive GM's are aggressive because they're young, not because they're aggressive. I guess if they were older they could not be aggressive because it would not be possible. DNA maybe. An alternative explanation would be that they could be aggressive if it suited them, but sit idly by and get nothing done out of choice or perhaps some unspoken agreement with others of their class. I must say I feel neglected. I'm over 50 and I haven't been invited to any meetings of this type nor have the benefits of being idle and not getting anything done ever been adequately explained to me.

You mention appearances. Appearances can be deceiving which is the whole point. It appeared to Al Campanis that African Americans "may not have some of the necessities to be, let's say, a field manager, or, perhaps, a general manager" and he was foolish enough to say so publicly at the expense of his career. I can't imagine anyone here would embrace his point-of-view as stated. Why is this same basic line of reasoning OK if age is the issue and not race?

As far as your bias is concerned, I understand why you have it. As you point out, a lot of people share it and it's certainly not the exclusive domain of beleaguered Orioles fans. What I don't understand is why the inductive reasoning that informs it should be compelling enough to be persuasive. In the grand scheme of things, were the senile maunderings of Syd Thrift really that much worse than the consummate idiocy of young Kevin Malone in LA? Stupidity is a democratic fellow; perhaps the standard should be competence and not age.

As far as bias is concerned, we all are prone to it. Myself, I feel that it's not enough to admit we have it, the real test is the lengths we go to to suppress it. But hey, that might be nothing more than a relic of my advancing age. Feel free to dismiss it out-of-hand on that basis alone.

[24fps]

Well, first of all, I guess we need to identify who the older GMs are anymore.

Wade, AM and Hendry come to mind...and they seem to fail in the aspects I am talking about. Coincidence that there teams are also 3 of the worst in the sport and are woefully behind most of the league?

Not a lot of the older GMs in the game anymore...It has gone to the newer and younger guys.

Such is life. This observation would be recognizable to the Greek playwrights, not to mention Shakespeare, all of whom obviously knew nothing about baseball.

twoBShorty's statistical breakdown is interesting, but from an age standpoint, I suspect it's representative of many industries in America. In that light, it's always dangerous to infer too much when looking at aggregrate data and applying it to a discrete individual. IMO you're better served by taking other, far more meaningful variables into account as well - things that are unique to that individual. In bringing this up, I'm referencing other posts of yours in addition to this one.

Coincidence? Perhaps. Or possibly a mere statistical anomaly based on small sample size. You've heard of that before haven't you?

[twoBshorty]

Yeah, that was just a quick and dirty compilation for anyone who was wondering exactly how old these guys were for purposes of this discussion and where MacPhail fell in that range. It's kind of cool how the distribution mirrors the US population, though. 18/30 born before 1965 and qualifying as boomers, then a gradual decline to a paucity of guys born in the early '70s when there was a big bust, then another cluster when the birthrate started going up again after 1975. Weird.

[Moose Milligan]

My name is Moose Milligan and I'm an agist.

Sign me up, Pedro. I'll meet you in DC to talk to those people in the robes...they sound like an interesting bunch.