Could John Hart be our GM in waiting?

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, Ruzious said:

You can make that point, but you can't ignore that he SHOULD have known and done something about it.  From all the reports from weeks and months ago, it was common knowledge all around MLB what the Braves were doing.  Hart hired Coppy, and he was his direct boss.  The only way he didn't understand what was going on is if he was negligent in doing his job.  So, at best, he's quilty of negligence.    

The key sentence here is “[f]rom all  the reports from weeks and months ago, it was common knowledge all around MLB what the Braves were doing.”    I’m not aware of those reports - not saying they don’t exist, but I’d never heard about this issue until about two weeks ago.    So, I’d need more information of exactly when this became such “common knowledge” that Hart should have known.    If it wasn’t “common knowledge” before baseball started investigating, then what was Hart supposed to know?   

I don’t really know what “common knowledge”  means here.    Let’s say for example that some rumors were floating among the buscones that some scouts from other teams picked up.    Would you necessarily expect John Hart to know that, and would it be negligent if he didn’t?   I don’t necessarily think so.

[mdbdotcom]

5 hours ago, Ruzious said:

Exactly.  And he's unemployable either way, imo.  

But the Orioles don't participate in that market, so any perceived misbehavior of his in that arena is irrelevant to the O's. The odds that no other team will have him raises his employability for the O's, since they have a hard time hiring execs that other teams want.

[Number5]

52 minutes ago, mdbdotcom said:

But the Orioles don't participate in that market, so any perceived misbehavior of his in that arena is irrelevant to the O's. The odds that no other team will have him raises his employability for the O's, since they have a hard time hiring execs that other teams want.

Yeah.  My bank hires jewelry thieves as tellers since they've never stolen money and the bank has no jewelry to steal.  That way they can hire people that other banks won't hire.

[mdbdotcom]

2 hours ago, Number5 said:

Yeah.  My bank hires jewelry thieves as tellers since they've never stolen money and the bank has no jewelry to steal.  That way they can hire people that other banks won't hire.

I'm sorry your bank has as difficult a time hiring executives as the Orioles do. If they are run as poorly as the Orioles, perhaps you should bank elsewhere.

[Ruzious]

6 hours ago, mdbdotcom said:

But the Orioles don't participate in that market, so any perceived misbehavior of his in that arena is irrelevant to the O's. The odds that no other team will have him raises his employability for the O's, since they have a hard time hiring execs that other teams want.

Well, the logic in your first sentence makes absolutely no sense, imo. 

[Ruzious]

9 hours ago, Frobby said:

The key sentence here is “[f]rom all  the reports from weeks and months ago, it was common knowledge all around MLB what the Braves were doing.”    I’m not aware of those reports - not saying they don’t exist, but I’d never heard about this issue until about two weeks ago.    So, I’d need more information of exactly when this became such “common knowledge” that Hart should have known.    If it wasn’t “common knowledge” before baseball started investigating, then what was Hart supposed to know?   

I don’t really know what “common knowledge”  means here.    Let’s say for example that some rumors were floating among the buscones that some scouts from other teams picked up.    Would you necessarily expect John Hart to know that, and would it be negligent if he didn’t?   I don’t necessarily think so.

It sounds like you haven't been paying attention.  I'd suggest talking to any Braves fan.   

[Ruzious]

For those who hadn't been following the story, here's an article by the Braves' most popular baseball writer from October 14th.  http://www.macon.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/bill-shanks/article178936141.html

[mdbdotcom]

5 hours ago, Ruzious said:

Well, the logic in your first sentence makes absolutely no sense, imo. 

But the Davis and Trumbo contracts did? Logic is not particularly welcome in Birdland. Just root for the team and be happy.

[Ruzious]

24 minutes ago, mdbdotcom said:

But the Davis and Trumbo contracts did? Logic is not particularly welcome in Birdland. Just root for the team and be happy.

Ok, I'll try to stick to that.  Go O's!  

[Frobby]

7 hours ago, Ruzious said:

For those who hadn't been following the story, here's an article by the Braves' most popular baseball writer from October 14th.  http://www.macon.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/bill-shanks/article178936141.html

Thank you for this link.    The article states that two scouts, who are anonymous, have said Hart knew what was going on.    If so, as I stated above, then clearly Hart deserves a lifetime ban.    But absent direct knowledge, it’s still unclear to me why Hart “should have known,” just because he was team president.    

I suspect that whether MLB punishes Hart is largely academic. Maybe he could get some kind of advisory job in the future, but nobody’s going to hire him for a team president or GM job, least of all Peter Angelos.

[Ruzious]

I'm not sure why it's unclear to you, but I'll leave it at that - since I've already made my point. 

It's been reported quite a while ago that MLB is not going to punish Hart.