O's didn't give Red Sox permission to talk to Sig for GM job

[24fps]

12 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Why would Sig need Elias to do that? Couldn't he have just said "I'm not interested?"

I’m sure he was consulted out of respect if nothing else, but if he’s under contract it wouldn’t be automatic.  Because tampering is an issue the “courtesy” of allowing poaching if a promotion is attached is still formal. 

[Roll Tide]

I assume there was an internal conversation and Sig was likely not interested. I don’t believe that Elias would block him. 

[SemperFi]

I think this is much to do about nothing, companies interview to gain knowledge of best practices of their competition all the time.  Like me, I'm sure a number of us have signed non compete/non disclosure forms. 

I only know of Sig from what I have read and heard but question whether his talents necessarily translate to a GM position or if he would even be interested.  President of Baseball Ops, EVP, are all big titles that generally carry much more non baseball ops responsibility (marketing. financial, board, HR) which Elias had/has but I am not so sure Sig is involved in or wants to be involved in. 

Sig's title is Assistant GM but I'm not sure he has that "traditional MLB role", his title IMO really tells you how much Elias values his input and influence throughout the organization-it also makes him and the corresponding salary more difficult to "poach" or interview.  I also have a hard time believing (given what we know of their relationship) Elias would prevent him from interviewing if the interest was legitimate on both sides.   

[Morgan423]

Hasn't Sig stated on the record that he enjoys working on the challenge of helping turn around dumpster fire teams (as the O's were after the last regime ended)?

I don't think the three-games-under-500 Red Sox are quite at the disaster level needed to peak his interest. 

[Can_of_corn]

2 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

Why would Sig need Elias to do that? Couldn't he have just said "I'm not interested?"

Better optics for Sig.

[Osornot]

IDK I am just happy that he is still under contract.  Maybe he and Elias have longer-term commitments than I assumed.  

[Otter]

21 hours ago, Frobby said:

Agreed.   I don’t want employees who are resentful that they are being denied opportunities.  

Exactly.  We don't know what really happened behind closed doors, but if the O's really denied (or slow played) the request for someone to interview for a promotion that's a very bad look.  It potentially lowers morale, and also sets the stage for the Red Sox to deny us the chance to interview someone from their organization.  Like I said, we don't know if this is true but there is precedent for O's ownership denying these requests...

[24fps]

32 minutes ago, Otter said:

Exactly.  We don't know what really happened behind closed doors, but if the O's really denied (or slow played) the request for someone to interview for a promotion that's a very bad look.  It potentially lowers morale, and also sets the stage for the Red Sox to deny us the chance to interview someone from their organization.  Like I said, we don't know if this is true but there is precedent for O's ownership denying these requests...

I don't think it's necessarily a bad look.  My argument is that the time and expense the Orioles just went through to rebuild the organization has a lot of value and the bad look is on Boston (or any other team) if they think they can swoop in and cherry pick a key component of another team's rebuild to speed up fixing their own mess.  And if the Red Sox decide that they're going to retaliate in the future, well that's tomorrow's problem and one that's not likely to be all that impactful.

No one will argue that maintaining morale is critical, but OTOH it's perfectly reasonable to expect loyalty commensurate to the opportunity an executive is being given.  Say what you will about John Angelos, but it looks like he's provided Elias and Mejdal everything they've needed to do their job and it isn't finished yet.

The Blue Jays trying to hire away Duquette was a different situation.  He was directly contacted by the Blue Jays owner bypassing accepted procedure and directly flouting the rules against tampering.  Understandably PA pushed back hard.  There was very much a legal dimension to that situation that doesn't look to be the case here.  I suspect that, industry wide, these interview requests are more common than we know and are denied more often as well, but I don't know for sure.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, 24fps said:

I don't think it's necessarily a bad look.  My argument is that the time and expense the Orioles just went through to rebuild the organization has a lot of value and the bad look is on Boston (or any other team) if they think they can swoop in and cherry pick a key component of another team's rebuild to speed up fixing their own mess.  And if the Red Sox decide that they're going to retaliate in the future, well that's tomorrow's problem and one that's not likely to be all that impactful.

No one will argue that maintaining morale is critical, but OTOH it's perfectly reasonable to expect loyalty commensurate to the opportunity an executive is being given.  Say what you will about John Angelos, but it looks like he's provided Elias and Mejdal everything they've needed to do their job and it isn't finished yet.

The Blue Jays trying to hire away Duquette was a different situation.  He was directly contacted by the Blue Jays owner bypassing accepted procedure and directly flouting the rules against tampering.  Understandably PA pushed back hard.  There was very much a legal dimension to that situation that doesn't look to be the case here.  I suspect that, industry wide, these interview requests are more common than we know and are denied more often as well, but I don't know for sure.

If they slow-rolled approval it is absolutely a bad look, I'd say a worse look than outright denying permission.

The industry norm is to allow folks to interview for promotions.

Would you have felt that way if Elias had been denied the chance to interview with the O's?

If the O's are not doing that and not even being upfront about it, yea it could impact the caliber of applicant they get in the future.

Frankly it sound like how Peter did things.

 

 

[Aristotelian]

17 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

 

The industry norm is to allow folks to interview for promotions.

I am sure this is the case but I am curious, what is the reasoning? Do front office contracts work different than players? If they get a nice guaranteed job and the team is obligated to them, it seems the team should have the right to keep them.

[Can_of_corn]

5 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

I am sure this is the case but I am curious, what is the reasoning? Do front office contracts work different than players? If they get a nice guaranteed job and the team is obligated to them, it seems the team should have the right to keep them.

They have the right.  The O's absolutely had the right to hold Dan to his contract.

The general understanding in the industry is you let your people interview for promotions. 

My guess is the whole system works a lot more smoothly this way.

If you don't allow your folks to do it, and other teams do, you are going to be at a hiring disadvantage.  As an owner you should understand that at some point you are going to be the one trying to hire someone away.

Edited October 29, 2023 by Can_of_corn

[drjohnnyfever1]

So you allow the conversation.  What then?  With a normal ownership group I wouldn't even really question teams putting feelers out.  But "what then" becomes the question with John Angelos holding the purse strings.

Sig gets offered the kitchen sink and then the house the sink is in and what does this ownership group do next?  Lol. 

I'm glad they said, "No."  But I hope Sig was in on the "No." otherwise, that's a resentment scenario and we've had enough of that thru the 2000's.  The BoSux would throw a crazy deal at him because they can and assuming Sig would be interested in crazy money he says, "I really like it here but that's a lot of dough."  Does anyone trust John Angelos, who just spent the Playoff run talking about having no money to sign the upcoming stars, to handle this in a way that sees Sig still here?  lol

The best answer was/is, "Nope."

For us it's the right answer.  It's not the right answer for normal organizations.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, drjohnnyfever1 said:

So you allow the conversation.  What then?  With a normal ownership group I wouldn't even really question teams putting feelers out.  But "what then" becomes the question with John Angelos holding the purse strings.

Sig gets offered the kitchen sink and then the house the sink is in and what does this ownership group do next?  Lol. 

I'm glad they said, "No."  But I hope Sig was in on the "No." otherwise, that's a resentment scenario and we've had enough of that thru the 2000's.  The BoSux would throw a crazy deal at him because they can and assuming Sig would be interested in crazy money he says, "I really like it here but that's a lot of dough."  Does anyone trust John Angelos, who just spent the Playoff run talking about having no money to sign the upcoming stars, to handle this in a way that sees Sig still here?  lol

The best answer was/is, "Nope."

For us it's the right answer.  It's not the right answer for normal organizations.

If Sig wanted to interview and they didn't allow it, I think it's a loss for the team.  If you are looking for a job and have options why would you pick Baltimore if you know they won't let you advance?

 

[Since1984]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

Would you have felt that way if Elias had been denied the chance to interview with the O's?

Elias’ contract had expired,  I forget if Sig’s did too

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, Since1984 said:

Elias’ contract had expired,  I forget if Sig’s did too

Was a hypothetical situation.