I want a younger GM

[DrungoHazewood]

And at least Duquette and Flanny would scour the wire for waiver claims during the entire season, which is how we got Guthrie.MacPhail seems to work only before Opening Day, at the deadline and after the season for talent acquisition.The rest of the time he's probably too busy planning on what to wear at each press conference he'll hold at one of those times.Syd Thrift was more creative and aggressive than Andy MacPhail.

Do you always have to undermine you credibility with ridiculous assertions that obviously betray you biases? There has never been a time you've been closer to relevance, but you keep shooting yourself in the foot.

[Moose Milligan]

Do you always have to undermine you credibility with ridiculous assertions that obviously betray you biases? There has never been a time you've been closer to relevance, but you keep shooting yourself in the foot.

Did you miss the post earlier where he just blanketed the entire MacPhail family and said none of them would ever be a good GM?

[Catch 8]

We already employ enough old people: our players. Gotta spread the love around for youngsters somehow.

[Catch 8]

Being serious, "stereotyping" gets a really bad rap because, in some instances, it is abused. Stereotyping is a science, albeit an imperfect one. Sure it can be used erroneously/deleteriously, but it often serves good as well. I could expound on this, but super-common sense kicks in at this point. Anyway, I see a bear! Not all bears attack, so I'm going to attempt to shake its hand (paw). Intelligent?

[Phantom]

I want a GM with a mindset similar to the successful, young GMs in baseball.

Now, let's discuss the merits of that thought as opposed to arguing over ageism.

[Frobby]

Paul Richards was 46 when he was appointed as Orioles' General Manger

Lee MacPhail was 40 when he was appointed as Orioles' GM

Hank Peters was 50 when he was appointed as Orioles' GM

Pat Gillick was 59 when he was appointed as the Orioles' GM

Frank Wren was 40 when he was appointed as the Orioles' GM.

[Frobby]

By the way, I wonder whether MacPhail has been grooming Matt Klentak as his successor. Klentak is 31 years old, I believe (2002 college grad). Here is his bio:

Klentak joins the Orioles after spending the last four years working in Major League Baseball's Labor Relations Department, where he provided advice and interpretations on the Collective Bargaining Agreement and Major League Rules to all 30 Major League teams. He also served as a key administrator in both the Salary Arbitration Support Program and the Rule 4 Draft Support Program, providing economic and baseball analyses for Owners Meetings, GM Meetings and Scouting/Farm Director Meetings and serving as the primary contact for Club personnel regarding Major League contract terms, language and data maintenance in MLB's IT systems.

Klentak was also a key member of the MLB Collective Bargaining team that successfully negotiated a second consecutive CBA without a work stoppage in 2006. It was on this team that Klentak and MacPhail first worked together.

Prior to joining the Commissioner's Office, Klentak spent the 2003 season in the Baseball Operations Department of the Colorado Rockies. While there, he gained experience in video and advance scouting, coordinated the inflow of all amateur scouting reports and authored several baseball and financial analyses throughout the season.

Born and raised in Medfield, MA, Klentak graduated in 2002 with a degree in Economics from Dartmouth College, where he was a four-year baseball letterman, three-year starting shortstop and team captain his senior year. The Big Green won two Ivy League Red Rolfe Division championships (2000 and 2001) during his playing days.

http://baltimore.orioles.mlb.com/news/press_releases/press_release.jsp?ymd=20080226&content_id=2389999&vkey=pr_bal&fext=.jsp&c_id=bal

[Stotle]

By the way, I wonder whether MacPhail has been grooming Matt Klentak as his successor. Klentak is 31 years old, I believe (2002 college grad). Here is his bio:

http://baltimore.orioles.mlb.com/news/press_releases/press_release.jsp?ymd=20080226&content_id=2389999&vkey=pr_bal&fext=.jsp&c_id=bal

Jon over at Camden Depot wrote up Klentak in his piece covering potential successors for MacPhail. It was a good read.

[Guest rochester]

Running a baseball team has changed pretty dramatically in the last 20-30 years. People who were raised on and learned the system from the powers-that-were 30 years ago (who were in turn tutored by the guys from the 1950s and 60s), are much more likely to hold on to outmoded ideas and ways of doing business. I think this is more true in baseball than a lot of other businesses because of the emphasis baseball places on tradition.

I'll take any proactive, innovative GM, I just think it's far more likely to find one of those who is younger.

ok, that makes perfect sense - thanks

[DrOrioles90210]

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.

No one is saying that younger GMs are more aggressive because they are young. Because they are younger, they grew up around the game in a different era. They grew up in this world in a different era. That seems to mold their behavior as a GM to be more aggressive.

[PaulFolk]

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.

Looking at this list, the oldest GMs aren't too shabby. Jack Z has gotten a lot of praise for some of the things he's done in Seattle, and Alderson just landed the Giants' top pitching prospect for a free-agent-to-be. Meanwhile, some of the more heavily criticized GMs-- Moore and Reagins-- are on the younger end of the spectrum.

[glenn__davis]

No one is saying that younger GMs are more aggressive because they are young. Because they are younger, they grew up around the game in a different era. They grew up in this world in a different era. That seems to mold their behavior as a GM to be more aggressive.

I think the term "aggressive" is used too often around here as an automatic positive attribute (not saying you specifically are doing this, just a general observation).

You absolutely can be a conservative, methodical GM and still be successful, provided you can do it well.

Drungo used the word "proactive". I like that a lot more. Maybe it's just semantics, I don't know.

[Pedro Cerrano]

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.

Get the heck out of town!!!!

You really should find something more constructive to do on this board than make a bigger deal out of this thread than it really is.

[Stotle]

I think the term "aggressive" is used too often around here as an automatic positive attribute (not saying you specifically are doing this, just a general observation).

You absolutely can be a conservative, methodical GM and still be successful, provided you can do it well.

Drungo used the word "proactive". I like that a lot more. Maybe it's just semantics, I don't know.

I think you are right. Beane is aggressive to a fault at times. Anything in excess is likely to cause issues of some sort.

[DrOrioles90210]

I think the term "aggressive" is used too often around here as an automatic positive attribute (not saying you specifically are doing this, just a general observation).

You absolutely can be a conservative, methodical GM and still be successful, provided you can do it well.

Drungo used the word "proactive". I like that a lot more. Maybe it's just semantics, I don't know.

Very true, and I only meant "aggressive" in the positive sense, so "proactive" would have probably been a better word to use.