The O's can have their cake and eat it too

[weams]

1 hour ago, spiritof66 said:

I have a higher regard for Duquette than most others who comment here. In part that's because I can't tell what constraints he operates under (but I'm sure there are some significant ones) or what decisions have been made by someone else (but I'm sure there have been some)

That said, I wouldn't be unhappy to see him go, except for one thing. I have no confidence that there are extremely able people who are willing to take this job, and to the extent there are I have no confidence that the Orioles will hire one of them. I can imagine being really unhappy when Duquette's successor is announced.

Hard to tell who might have the skills to handle a job that a couple handfuls of men occupy in the world. I guess at that level, it is no longer just having a good face. I've seen far more buffoons move into MLB executive management than I have mountain climbers. 

[Roll Tide]

55 minutes ago, weams said:

Hard to tell who might have the skills to handle a job that a couple handfuls of men occupy in the world. I guess at that level, it is no longer just having a good face. I've seen far more buffoons move into MLB executive management than I have mountain climbers. 

And you have to admit that Peter Angelos and company can be impossible to deal with.

[Roll Tide]

Just now, Roll Tide said:

And you have to admit that Peter Angelos and company can be impossible to deal with.

Thinking about this more, My old company wanted their best salespeople to be dynamic closers with swagger, when dealing with its customers. When they dealt with the company, said company wanted them to be obedient and soft.

I think this is the same problem working for Peter Angelos. This is part of the reason that great Gms like Pat Gillick couldn't/wouldn't stick around.

[weams]

46 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

Thinking about this more, My old company wanted their best salespeople to be dynamic closers with swagger, when dealing with its customers. When they dealt with the company, said company wanted them to be obedient and soft.

I think this is the same problem working for Peter Angelos. This is part of the reason that great Gms like Pat Gillick couldn't/wouldn't stick around.

Great GMs? Maybe six or eight in the world. 

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, weams said:

Great GMs? Maybe six or eight in the world. 

Thousands, just most don't get a chance.

[Frobby]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

Thousands, just most don't get a chance.

Probably hundreds on this website alone -- in their own minds.

[weams]

7 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Thousands, just most don't get a chance.

Nope. Not hardly. It is a fine wine skill. 

[weams]

7 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Probably hundreds on this website alone -- in their own minds.

Not one here. Or anywhere in the civilian world. That I know. 

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, weams said:

Nope. Not hardly. It is a fine wine skill. 

7,500,000,000.

 

[Natty]

We simply need a GM that understands this...

Pitching wins games. 

[thezeroes]

30 minutes ago, Natty said:

We simply need a GM that understands this...

Pitching wins games. 

Affordable young pitching keeps you relevant for years.  Over paying for pitching makes your budget and player movement a moot point.

[Roll Tide]

1 hour ago, weams said:

Great GMs? Maybe six or eight in the world. 

Pat Gillick was a great GM in my opinion.

[weams]

5 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

Pat Gillick was a great GM in my opinion.

He's a Hall of Famer. There are not six Hall of Famers currently in office. 

[weams]

34 minutes ago, thezeroes said:

Affordable young pitching keeps you relevant for years.  Over paying for pitching makes your budget and player movement a moot point.

No way for a competitive team in a smaller market to get that type of pitching without trading off its better players as they approach Free Agency.