Andy MacPhail - Disappointing GM

[whatdoiget000]

SG asked the question so I answered it.

And for the millionth time, it's not about landing Tex, but rather how we pursued him and how MacPhail pursues premium FA talent in general. The way he handled the Teixeira pursuit fits with his track record of never landing a premium FA.

What makes you think he wanted to pay 200MM for Tex? Or that he needs to for any FA?

The Red Sox had 2 recent championship teams. Manny Ramirez was not signed by Epstein. His contract was largely considered a mistake, with the Sox constantly trying to deal him. David Ortiz was not a premium FA when signed. He was signed to a one year deal for 1MM and extended. Curt Schilling, Pedro Martinez, Derek Lowe, and Josh Beckett were traded for. Outside of Drew and Dice-K (who were both regrettable contracts), Epstein hasn't signed anyone.

Weren't you a proponent of trading for and signing A-Gon? Because MacPhail's done that quite a few times. And I know Moises Alou may not have seemed like a big signing, but the 3 years prior to his deal, he hit about .330 with 30 HR's each year.

[baltfan]

Non-scientific polls on message board websites are not an accurate measure of fan sentiment.

MSK

Is it really unscientific if no one member can vote more than once? Usually internet polls aren't valuable because a group can drive all of its supporters to it and they can vote numerous times. Here the poll is on the front page and available to all members who each get one vote.

How is this poll that much different than asking everyone in the room if they prefer Bush or Obama? Isn't it a valid poll of the people in the room--AKA Orioles Hangout?

[howie14]

I read the first couple of pages then jumped to the end to see if anything had changed. Same old, same old.

I personally get a little tired of the term "kool-aid drinker". This little rhetorical trick is used to try to establish that those who disagree with the poster aren't thinking. Many on this board support AM at this time because he has undertaken something they wanted to see happen long ago. They support the basic strategy and still find a way to greatly criticize specific decisions within that strategy. I really don't see the term "kool-aid drinker" as applying here. They realize that it might take some time and are willing to be patient.

This doesn't make them fools. It also doesn't mean their patience is endless, it just means they have more of it than those who already want to fire AM and go another way.

Unlike the other regimes of this decade, AM's has been allowed to choose a direction and stick to it. I'm willing to go along, for now, but reserve the right to declare it a success or failure at a later date.

[Satyr3206]

I've got it. We should send Andy to Charm School and get him some of that pheremone oil to attract "premium FA's".

[Orioles West]

I read the first couple of pages then jumped to the end to see if anything had changed. Same old, same old.

I personally get a little tired of the term "kool-aid drinker". This little rhetorical trick is used to try to establish that those who disagree with the poster aren't thinking. Many on this board support AM at this time because he has undertaken something they wanted to see happen long ago. They support the basic strategy and still find a way to greatly criticize specific decisions within that strategy. I really don't see the term "kool-aid drinker" as applying here. They realize that it might take some time and are willing to be patient.

This doesn't make them fools. It also doesn't mean their patience is endless, it just means they have more of it than those who already want to fire AM and go another way.

Unlike the other regimes of this decade, AM's has been allowed to choose a direction and stick to it. I'm willing to go along, for now, but reserve the right to declare it a success or failure at a later date.

There is much wisdom in this observation. I concur.

-Don

[JTrea81]

Weren't you a proponent of trading for and signing A-Gon? Because MacPhail's done that quite a few times. And I know Moises Alou may not have seemed like a big signing, but the 3 years prior to his deal, he hit about .330 with 30 HR's each year.

Alou was 34, hardly the prototypical premium bat. If he was a premium bat, Raul Ibanez would have to be considered a premium bat, which he was not.

And I've already stated in this thread, I am on board with trading our pitching for a premium bat.

[VTmook213]

Alou was 34, hardly the prototypical premium bat. If he was a premium bat, Raul Ibanez would have to be considered a premium bat, which he was not.

Does the fact that Raul Ibanez wasn't considered a "premium bat" take away from the impact he's had this year? Does it make that signing less impressive?

Let's be honest, a large part of developing talent and a good roster is luck. Did anyone know how good Santana was going to be at first? Nope, not at all. If you want to say the Twins "lucked" into him and don't deserve credit for trading for him, well, I suppose that's your prerogative. But if that's going to be your stance, then don't you also have to give credit to those who took the risk?

[hatepaste]

SG asked the question so I answered it.

And for the millionth time, it's not about landing Tex, but rather how we pursued him and how MacPhail pursues premium FA talent in general. The way he handled the Teixeira pursuit fits with his track record of never landing a premium FA.

But you really don't know how we pursued him. So you are unqualified to discuss it.