Jump to content

Andy MacPhail - Disappointing GM


JTrea81

Recommended Posts

Well yes he earned it, but that's not the point. The point is that he would have never been a candidate if AM's SP 2009 staff fillers panned out a little longer than 1/2 the season.

It wasn't even necessarily them panning out, how about just not getting injured? Simon and Hill both injured. Eaton just stunk. Hendrickson could still be "filler" he's nothing special.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 307
  • Created
  • Last Reply

If you're not going to read and understand what I'm saying, which is very simple, please stop responding. I have no desire to bounce this very simple, logical thought process off a brick wall who refuses to acknowledge my main points and keeps pointing out things like "what about Josh Beckett". I've never interpreted you to be that before, but you're being incredibly obtuse in this thread.

Dude, relax. I have also made the same points that folks seem to be missing, no reason to cross the line into being nasty.

I do completely understand what you're saying about the fallibility of FA pitchers, but I am mainly saying that AM has not traditionally shown a track record of grabbing elite level FAs when they become available.

MSK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well yes he earned it, but that's not the point. The point is that he would have never been a candidate if AM's SP 2009 staff fillers panned out a little longer than 1/2 the season.

I am really not following this logic, tho I guess if Hill doesnt hit the DL, nor was horrible, Matusz wouldnt have been seen.

But the fact remains that, say we did sign Wolf and he hits the DL, we were still in a spot where we could have called up Chris Waters, David Pauley, Radhames Liz, or Brian Matusz and MacPhail chose Matusz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you have anything to back that up?

I mean I can list teams as well.

Well logically those teams would have been interested at the beginning of the year because they needed a middle of the order bat that played at 1B/3B/OF. Hell, the Giants still need a big bat to complement Sandoval.

Even Ken Rosenthal called Huff a "highly desirable trade commodity" last winter.

The Orioles' Aubrey Huff, owed $8 million in the final year of his contract next season, should be a highly desirable trade commodity this off-season, at least within the American League.

Hardly anyone knows it, but Huff ranks first in the AL in extra-base hits and third in on-base/slugging percentage. His defense at first and third is below average, but he would represent affordable power for several clubs.

The Angels could seek to acquire Huff if they lose Mark Teixeira as a free agent. The Yankees could view Huff as a potential left-handed hitting replacement for Jason Giambi. The Jays could pursue Huff as a veteran DH if they are unwilling to commit to Snider and Lind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well logically those teams would have been interested at the beginning of the year because they needed a middle of the order bat that played at 1B/3B/OF. Hell, the Giants still need a big bat to complement Sandoval.

Even Ken Rosenthal called Huff a "highly desirable trade commodity" last winter.

Key word: should

Link to comment
Share on other sites

San Francisco, Detroit, Seattle, Atlanta just to name a few

San Francisco was coming off a 72 win season. Detroit won 74 games. Seattle had won 61 games. Atlanta won 72 games. Yet you believe this past offseason that these teams were interested in Aubrey Huff. :confused:

As soon as someone wanted Huff, we traded him. Remember, the guy wasn't even claimed on waivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MacPhail gave Derek Lee 5/65

Under MacPhail the Cubs Payroll went from 64 million in 2001 to 94 million in 2006.

So this belief that MacPhail won't spend money is completely ridiculous.

http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2005/01/chicago-cubs_112114177768677294.html

And what FAs did he bring in during that time?

People that continue to bring up that he signs his own are missing the point...No one is saying that is the issue...The issue is will he go out and spend big dollars for a player that isn't on his team? Or, will he trade a package of young players for a premium bat/pitcher?

Off the top of my head, I don't think he has ever done either of these things.

BTW, AM is in a much different situation now than he was before...He ain't in the NL central anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Atlanta has Kochtman at first and Chipper at third to start the season.

Detroit had Guillen and Cabrera at 3B/1B. Possibly Huff as a DH, I could see that.

Seattle has Beltre at 3B. They have Branyan at first now. But were they really planning on competing this year after a 100 loss season?

SF - Kind of same thing. Were they looking to compete where they needed a one year rental?

These teams solved their problems in other ways. Seattle signed Branyan in the offseason. The Giants recently traded for Garko. The Braves needed a LF, which Huff could provided them..but would have been a stretch. Detroit, as they have shown recently, needed a Huff type bat in their lineup and could have put him any where in their lineup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well logically those teams would have been interested at the beginning of the year because they needed a middle of the order bat that played at 1B/3B/OF. Hell, the Giants still need a big bat to complement Sandoval.

Even Ken Rosenthal called Huff a "highly desirable trade commodity" last winter.

Huff's trade value was never high. If it was, he would've been claimed in August last year.

Nobody was giving up any significant talent for him in the offseason. MacPhail didn't screw up anything there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't even necessarily them panning out, how about just not getting injured? Simon and Hill both injured. Eaton just stunk. Hendrickson could still be "filler" he's nothing special.

We all knew Eaton stunk. And Simon and Hill were huge questions marks, as were Hennessey and Parrish. Hendrickson was always destined to be the swingman/lefty option like Burress. And Uehara was also a question mark. Wolf might have not been a sure bet, but he still would have outperformed Eaton and the rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Key word: should

Let's face it, there is no doubt that AM would have valued Huff very high last offseason and likely wouldn't have been ok with paying a decent portion of his contract.

Key word is should...that could also mean if AM's demands are realistic and if he will eat money, he could get a decent package for him.

We saw the way Huff was dramatically overrated by 90% of this board...I am not sure why we should think AM felt much differently than most of you did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huff's trade value was never high. If it was, he would've been claimed in August last year.

Nobody was giving up any significant talent for him in the offseason. MacPhail didn't screw up anything there.

This is such a horrible argument.

1) Maybe people would have wanted to see Huff finish out the year and see how he ends up.

2) He was owed less money.

3) Teams change because FAs leave, players get dealt, etc....All of a sudden a team that passes on Huff in August needs him in December.

So please, enough of that argument...It is as poor as the one that said was going to be a 875+ OPS player this year and that we would offer him arbitration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am really not following this logic, tho I guess if Hill doesnt hit the DL, nor was horrible, Matusz wouldnt have been seen.

But the fact remains that, say we did sign Wolf and he hits the DL, we were still in a spot where we could have called up Chris Waters, David Pauley, Radhames Liz, or Brian Matusz and MacPhail chose Matusz.

It was either going to be Matusz or Waters. Pauley isn't on the 40. And we know what to expect from Liz. Patton and Arrieta were ruled out because of their AAA performance. I guess giving Matusz a few starts doesn't hurt his development, but AM would tell you he would have rather not be put in that situation at the beginning of the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These teams solved their problems in other ways. Seattle signed Branyan in the offseason. The Giants recently traded for Garko. The Braves needed a LF, which Huff could provided them..but would have been a stretch. Detroit, as they have shown recently, needed a Huff type bat in their lineup and could have put him any where in their lineup.

But all of these teams made moves recently because they're unexpectedly competing. And with Detroit, part of the problem they needed a bat is because of injuries (Guillen) and poor performance (Ordonez).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And what FAs did he bring in during that time?

People that continue to bring up that he signs his own are missing the point...No one is saying that is the issue...The issue is will he go out and spend big dollars for a player that isn't on his team? Or, will he trade a package of young players for a premium bat/pitcher?

Off the top of my head, I don't think he has ever done either of these things.

BTW, AM is in a much different situation now than he was before...He ain't in the NL central anymore.

He traded for two guys that turned into premium bats---Aramis Ramirez and Derrick Lee. Why isn't that just as good, if not better, than spending money on guys in free agency that provide similar production. He didn't have to spend a ton of money on big bats because he found them another way.

That is what you want a GM to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...