Ed Rogers attempts a Coup D'etat

[mdbdotcom]

Having the Yankees involved makes it even more unlikely that Peter Angelos will give his approval. Two division rival conspiring to steal his VP of Baseball Operations is not something that Peter will back down from IMO. There is not reason that the O's should be disadvantage at all in this situation. Its is not of their making.

Good point. It's as if the Yankees and Blue Jays were saying, "If you can't beat them, eff them up."

[tntoriole]

Having the Yankees involved makes it even more unlikely that Peter Angelos will give his approval. Two division rivals conspiring to steal his VP of Baseball Operations is not something that Peter will back down from IMO. There is not reason that the O's should be disadvantage at all in this situation. Its is not of their making.

I agree that Potter will not "back down." He will either pillage sufficient bounty of his liking or DD will stay here.

[weams]

I agree that Potter will not "back down." He will either pillage sufficient bounty of his liking or DD will stay here.

I am of the opinion that MLB and the players association will not permit a significant exchange of on field assets for a front office individual. It would have to be cash or property. And Rogers Communications wont allow that. They fired Ed Rogers. After his father died.

[mdbdotcom]

I am of the opinion that MLB and the players association will not permit a significant exchange of on field assets for a front office individual. It would have to be cash or property. And Rogers Communications wont allow that. They fired Ed Rogers. After his father died.

As long as MASN gets their TV rights, I'm fine with that.

[AdamK]

Hypothetically... And if this is even possible, what about draft picks? (Plural)

How many would suffice given the iffy nature of prospects? They aren't current players/prospects, they'd be future ones. And since they'd be poaching our GM this seems like a way that we could control the players selected rather than remove players from their system.

Would that be a "fairer" method?

[weams]

Hypothetically... And if this is even possible, what about draft picks? (Plural)

How many would suffice given the iffy nature of prospects? They aren't current players/prospects, they'd be future ones. And since they'd be poaching our GM this seems like a way that we could control the players selected rather than remove players from their system.

Would that be a "fairer" method?

I do not think that is something that can happen. An idea outside the box, but too far outside I fear.

[tntoriole]

I am of the opinion that MLB and the players association will not permit a significant exchange of on field assets for a front office individual. It would have to be cash or property. And Rogers Communications wont allow that. They fired Ed Rogers. After his father died.

So that assumes, I guess, that managers are not front office employees? If they are, the union did not object to the Lou Piniella for Randy Winn trade. And they did not object to the prospects exchanges for Epstein and Andy Macphail. I guess it would hinge upon the definition of "significant."

[weams]

So that assumes, I guess, that managers are not front office employees? If they are, the union did not object to the Lou Piniella for Randy Winn trade. And they did not object to the prospects exchanges for Epstein and Andy Macphail. I guess it would hinge upon the definition of "significant."

Managers are on field. Though they maybe listed as front office, They still count as on field.

[weams]

So that assumes, I guess, that managers are not front office employees? If they are, the union did not object to the Lou Piniella for Randy Winn trade. And they did not object to the prospects exchanges for Epstein and Andy Macphail. I guess it would hinge upon the definition of "significant."

Yes, significant. Not no compensation, just inconsequential. This is a pandoras box neither side wants opened. They do not want to create a poaching environment as the new market inefficiency.

[tntoriole]

Managers are on field. Though they maybe listed as front office, They still count as on field.

I am not sure I agree for this narrow situation. If managers were in the category of players, then they would be traded much more often. We could get a lot more for Buck probably than Dan, lol. Managers are not part of or subject to the union's determinations. I believe that MLB and the union would allow prospects or players to be exchanged as compensation for DD. But that remains to be seen, I reckon.

[weams]

I am not sure I agree for this narrow situation. If managers were in the category of players, then they would be traded much more often. We could get a lot more for Buck probably than Dan, lol. Managers are not part of or subject to the union's determinations. I believe that MLB and the union would allow prospects or players to be exchanged as compensation for DD. But that remains to be seen, I reckon.

I should have said uniformed personnel to be most clear.

[weams]

I am not sure I agree for this narrow situation. If managers were in the category of players, then they would be traded much more often. We could get a lot more for Buck probably than Dan, lol. Managers are not part of or subject to the union's determinations. I believe that MLB and the union would allow prospects or players to be exchanged as compensation for DD. But that remains to be seen, I reckon.

http://baltimore.orioles.mlb.com/team/front_office.jsp?c_id=bal

[tntoriole]

http://baltimore.orioles.mlb.com/team/front_office.jsp?c_id=bal

Where does Buck fit in the organizational flow chart? He is a non union, contract employee of Baltimore Orioles Baseball Club, Inc., isn't he? Is he tradeable?

[weams]

Where does Buck fit in the organizational flow chart? He is a non union, contract employee of Baltimore Orioles Baseball Club, Inc., isn't he? Is he tradeable?

I would guess so. There is precedent. I promise, I am not arguing. I assume he would have to want to go though. His contract can not be assignable. He is not in the flow chart. He is like a shop foreman. Management. But.

[tntoriole]

I would guess so. There is precedent. I promise, I am not arguing. I assume he would have to want to go though. His contract can not be assignable. He is not in the flow chart. He is like a shop foreman. Management. But.

Oh me neither. It is just interesting. I spend time consulting about organizational flow charts, contracts and employee relationships.