John Angelos chews out Dan Connolly

[Can_of_corn]

5 minutes ago, ThisIsBirdland said:

I think some owners in sports have more of a competitive drive to invest more resources in a winning program. Whether that comes more from a personal desire to win or viewing it as a long-term investment to generate a more profitable franchise is tough to determine. I think winning is more important to Steve Cohen than it is to the Angelos'.

 

2 minutes ago, HakunaSakata said:

I think the Mets are still a shiny new toy for Cohen. I'll be curious to see if he's still handing out huge contracts in five years or so. 

From what I understand Cohen's Father-In-Law is a huge Mets fan and in poor health.

 

[HakunaSakata]

3 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

It’s not Mike Elias job to answer these questions. Mike runs the baseball ops. These are business questions. This is 100% on John. 
 

This isn’t about athletes being role models, it’s about the positive impact a franchise can have on a community. This isn’t about his payroll spending to me either. You can still make your money and be accountable to the fans. This isn’t hard. 
 

What was stopping him from having a business executive from the team being there today instead of him? The man never shows his face and then all of the sudden says look at me?

He was definitely grandstanding, but I still think Elias could have been more transparent throughout this process too, especially now that the dust has mostly settled on free agency. Who did they pursue / "actually" offer contracts? Are they actively looking to trade for pitching? Are they looking into locking up young talent? Is there a targeted payroll number for the next few seasons? I feel like these questions that should be able to be answered by the GM.  In some ways I think a good GM should be more of the face of the franchise than an owner. The best thing an owner can do is hire talented people then get/stay out of their way. 

[HakunaSakata]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

 

From what I understand Cohen's Father-In-Law is a huge Mets fan and in poor health.

 

That's a pretty damn expensive pre-eulogy. 

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, HakunaSakata said:

That's a pretty damn expensive pre-eulogy. 

Quote

For you, the day Bison graced your village was the most important day of your life. But for me, it was Tuesday.

He can probably better afford it than Peter could afford his increased spending for a ring from 2012-2018.

[eddie83]

5 minutes ago, HakunaSakata said:

He was definitely grandstanding, but I still think Elias could have been more transparent throughout this process too, especially now that the dust has mostly settled on free agency. Who did they pursue / "actually" offer contracts? Are they actively looking to trade for pitching? Are they looking into locking up young talent? Is there a targeted payroll number for the next few seasons? I feel like these questions that should be able to be answered by the GM.  In some ways I think a good GM should be more of the face of the franchise than an owner. The best thing an owner can do is hire talented people then get/stay out of their way. 

The questions from today are bigger than what the current payroll is. 
 

I agree with you in large part on your last points. 
 

All the man has to do is talk to the media once a year and this in large part goes away.  

[Yardball85]

Pathetic attempt by a pathetic man (Angelos) to hide behind MLK Day as an excuse to not answer a real question.  Because it is MLK day, you can't be asked real questions?  What does that even mean?

[E-D-D-I-E]

1 hour ago, HakunaSakata said:

I mean, the bar has been set pretty low after these last few mayoral terms. Say what you will about Mayor Scott, at least he hasn't been convicted/sentenced to jail time!

Allow me to add one word to your correct statement. 

YET!

 

[Frobby]

To me, this presser was called to discuss the Orioles investment in the College Bound program.  That’s why the Mayor and the head of the program were there.  It’s MLK day and an appropriate time to announce the investment and bring some publicity to the program.  That’s where the questions should have been focused.   It wasn’t the right time for Connolly’s questions.   But Angelos would have been better served to just cut them off, get back on topic and not get too sanctimonious or then start talking himself about the Orioles’ turnaround.   And he was foolish to offer up another presser to look at the O’s books and governance, unless he follows through and does it, which is probably a bad idea as well.   I’m interested to see where that goes.  

It will be interested to see if the papers cover the actual investment in College Bound and give that program some deserved attention, or whether the sideshow with Connolly becomes the whole story.  
 

[Can_of_corn]

15 minutes ago, Frobby said:

To me, this presser was called to discuss the Orioles investment in the College Bound program.  That’s why the Mayor and the head of the program were there.  It’s MLK day and an appropriate time to announce the investment and bring some publicity to the program.  That’s where the questions should have been focused.   It wasn’t the right time for Connolly’s questions.   But Angelos would have been better served to just cut them off, get back on topic and not get too sanctimonious or then start talking himself about the Orioles’ turnaround.   And he was foolish to offer up another presser to look at the O’s books and governance, unless he follows through and does it, which is probably a bad idea as well.   I’m interested to see where that goes.  

It will be interested to see if the papers cover the actual investment in College Bound and give that program some deserved attention, or whether the sideshow with Connolly becomes the whole story.  
 

I think this presser was called so John could bask in the glory of his generosity.

This could have been handled in a more low profile manner but John wanted some attention.

[Ohfan67]

1 hour ago, ThisIsBirdland said:

I think some owners in sports have more of a competitive drive to invest more resources in a winning program. Whether that comes more from a personal desire to win or viewing it as a long-term investment to generate a more profitable franchise is tough to determine. I think winning is more important to Steve Cohen than it is to the Angelos'.

In Peter Angelos' "defense", he acted a lot more like Steve Cohen in the 1990s...and that didn't really work out the way fans wanted. 

[Ohfan67]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

Wouldn't a non-answer reply been better than being confrontational?

This. I think the question and followup were not appropriate for the press conference, but totally predictable. A "we're here to celebrate MLK today and talk about the Oriole playing a bigger role in the community." And then move on. John Angelos acts like a guy that has not been asked a lot of questions by reporters. 

[Yardball85]

21 minutes ago, Ohfan67 said:

In Peter Angelos' "defense", he acted a lot more like Steve Cohen in the 1990s...and that didn't really work out the way fans wanted. 

He spent a lot on the 96 and 97 teams, and they were awesome... it didn't not work out, per se.  He spent wisely on Alomar, Palmeiro, etc. 

[Just Regular]

39 minutes ago, Frobby said:

And he was foolish to offer up another presser to look at the O’s books and governance, unless he follows through and does it, which is probably a bad idea as well.   I’m interested to see where that goes.  

Same.    If I am Jeff Passan or Buster Olney or Ken Rosenthal or Tom Verducci's editor, covering my beat I might have a baseball journalistic interest in getting my Main Guy on that.

Mets or Yanks peeved about Revenue Sharing and have any Wall Street Journal guys wanting to be in their good graces?

[Barnaby Graves]

Well John maybe Connolly just wants to know when the O's will be free at last, free at last.

Tacky response from Angelos but whatever.  Good for Connolly and anyone else who tries doing some journalism.  Whatever gets these people to give us some clue what's going on.

[spiritof66]

2 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Was it even OPACY or is it just the fact that it's really hard to get the other owners to approve a move?

MLB is likely to approve a franchise relocation for a team if it's stuck with a subpar stadium and has been unable to come up with a plan for a new one (including, of course, getting  state and local government to bear a large part of the cost). That's what's happening in Tampa and Oakland, and if either or both decide to relocate they'll get the owners' approval. (Well, maybe not for a goofy plan to play half your home games over a thousand miles away in another country.)

The MLB owners are very unlikely to approve relocation of a team that has financial problems despite playing in an appealing ballpark. If a team is not making a go of it n that situation, that's looked at as the team's fault, not a problem with MLB or its financial structure. Add to that the fact that there's no highly populated region of the country that's unserved by MLB and ought to be a relocation target, as there was when MLB expanded or teams moved to California, Texas, the Pacific Northwest, Colorado, Arizona and Florida.