Jump to content

Rosenthal talks about O's next GM: Nothing we don't already know...


Birds of B'more

Recommended Posts

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/mlb-playoffs-seeding-races-news-and-notes-090511

Simply lends more credence to what most of us already suspect.

If, as expected, Andy MacPhail departs as president of baseball operations, owner Peter Angelos will prefer someone with whom he is familiar, or at the very least, someone who comes highly recommended by a person he trusts.

That is Angelos’ pattern — he knew MacPhail from their work together in the 2002 and ’06 labor negotiations. And, according to one source, Angelos is not especially well-versed with the current crop of GM candidates. When asked about former Diamondbacks GM Josh Byrnes and Rangers assistant GM Thad Levine, Angelos essentially replied, “Who?” the source said.

Manager Buck Showalter, who seems to have replaced MacPhail as Angelos’ most trusted confidante, could have a say in choosing the next GM. But it’s also possible that MacPhail will have significant input, considering his relationship with Angelos over the years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Manager Buck Showalter' date=' who seems to have replaced MacPhail as Angelos’ most trusted confidante, could have a say in choosing the next GM.[/quote']

As much as it pains me to say it, looks like JTrea was right about the Buck/PA relationship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want Showalter to get any input on the next general manager. In fact, I want the next general manager to have COMPLETE input on whether Showalter is the next manager of the Orioles. That's the way it works, and should work.

It didn't work too badly when DJ picked Gillick...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The relationship between a manager and a GM should be essentially bicameral, and fit our traditional notions of how bicameralism works.
Not to necessarily disagree, but isn't it the GM's job to translate ownership's instructions to the on-field product? I fully agree they should collaborate, but the final decision is the GM's alone and should remain so.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to necessarily disagree, but isn't it the GM's job to translate ownership's instructions to the on-field product? I fully agree they should collaborate, but the final decision is the GM's alone and should remain so.

An excellent point - I meant mostly temparmentally/conceptually. I.e., the GM needs to be the "wiser," "cooler head" - thinking of long-term events...while a manager needs to be something closer to the fans, pushing for victories on a daily basis. The GM should clearly have the ability to reject what the manager wants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...