Jump to content

ROMAD1

GOOD LORD BOSTON MIGHT FIRE DAVE DOMBROWSKI!!!!

Recommended Posts

Quote

“Dave was the kind of guy who didn’t have much a process,” said one source familiar with the team’s thinking. “He is very good at making decisions right now based on instincts and advice. John likes a more process-oriented approach. And based on where the team is right now–the next couple of years could be rough–they don’t trust him to make those decisions.”

https://www.si.com/mlb/2019/09/09/boston-red-sox-fire-dave-dombrowski

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tiger337 said:

That's a reasonable argument, but the ring argument is silly.  A GM doesn't have much control over what happens in the playoffs.  

Agreed, but you'll note that I didn't make the ring argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, sabretooth said:

Agreed, but you'll note that I didn't make the ring argument.

Buddha did!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Buddha said:

why not?  being able to take your model and succeed in more than one place is a sign of ability.

Because there is no evidence Beane wouldn't be able to succeed in more than once place.

Maybe he would or maybe he wouldn't - one can only speculate, but to say DD is better because of something that hasn't been tested with regards to Beane doesn't seem fair to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Buddha said:

why not?  being able to take your model and succeed in more than one place is a sign of ability.

What's his model?   

I'd say in Beane's favor being able to go through the cycles of having a few down years followed by a run of 90 win seasons is a sign of ability too.  

Billy has to woo the women by being smart, having good conversations, and listening to them.  Dave just shows up with a Ferrari and ****s them and gets tossed out when they find out he's a douchebag who rented the ferrari but rented the beach house they stayed at with her CC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ROMAD1 said:

I'm sure MLB will figure out how Boston can have top picks. 

They are likely to lose ten spots with their first pick due to luxury tax penalties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Oblong said:

What's his model?   

I'd say in Beane's favor being able to go through the cycles of having a few down years followed by a run of 90 win seasons is a sign of ability too.  

Billy has to woo the women by being smart, having good conversations, and listening to them.  Dave just shows up with a Ferrari and ****s them and gets tossed out when they find out he's a douchebag who rented the ferrari but rented the beach house they stayed at with her CC.

again, im not saying billy beane is bad.  im saying dombrowski is good.  

i think he's just as good of a gm as billy beane even if they have different styles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

Because there is no evidence Beane wouldn't be able to succeed in more than once place.

Maybe he would or maybe he wouldn't - one can only speculate, but to say DD is better because of something that hasn't been tested with regards to Beane doesn't seem fair to me.

do you think dombrowski is a successful gm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ROMAD1 said:

I'm sure MLB will figure out how Boston can have top picks. 

You must think they're the Yankees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, tiger337 said:

Buddha did!

under what measure is beane better than dombrowski?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Buddha said:

do you think dombrowski is a successful gm?

Yes.

I merely was arguing against the premise he is better than Beane, in part, because he has been successful with multiple franchises.

That would be like arguing that Babe Ruth or Barry Bonds were better players than Ted Williams, in part, because they were successful with multiple franchises.

Or Sparky was a better manager than Tommy LaSorta, in part, because Sparky was successful with two franchises.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Buddha said:

again, im not saying billy beane is bad.  im saying dombrowski is good.  

i think he's just as good of a gm as billy beane even if they have different styles.

I don't disagree with that. I think I'd rather have Beane at this point for the Tigers though because I'm not sure Dave's methods are sustainable going forward, either with the Tigers or any other team.  It's a cliche but perhaps the game has passed him by.  He didn't really build anything in Boston.  He showed up in an existing org and made the decisions, but I imagine the FO is pretty much the same as it was when he got there.  It wasn't "his" front office.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bobrob2004 said:

Dombroski was selling Price and Cespedes during the 2015 trade deadline and then Ilitch opened up the checkbook to sign Zimmermann and Upton.  Dombrowski was choosing to rebuild, not out of financial necessity.  

I believe that DD traded Price and Cespedes during the 2015 trade deadline because it was understood that both would leave via FA after that season anyway.  Price netted Matthew Boyd & Daniel Norris, while Cespedes netted Michael Fulmer & Luis Cessa.  And IIRC correctly, Joakim Soria was also going to become a FA ..so DD traded him to Pittsburg for Jacoby Jones.  

Considering that Price, Cespedes, and Soria all could have been 2-month rentals for their new teams ..it was (IMHO) remarkable that DD was able to obtain 5 young, controllable, promising prospects Michael Fulmer, Luis Cessa, Jacoby Jones, Matthew Boyd, and Daniel Norris. 

Furthermore, at the time of those trades, I highly doubt Dave Dombrowski (as well as a majority of others inc. baseball executives, managers, coaches, writers, fans) had considered those trades as a 'rebuild' ..more like it was a 'retooling' or 'rebooting' to secure 5 young promising prospects for exceedingly expensive players who likely were leaving anyway.  

A closer look at the players involved reveals that Price, Cespedes, and Soria have a combined WAR of 25.1 since being traded.  Yes, they have been effective for their new teams.  However, Fulmer, Boyd, Norris, and JJones have a combined WAR of 18.9.  But lest anyone forget ..Luis Cessa was traded for Justin Wilson who later was traded (with Alex Avila) for Jeimer Candelario.  Significant because Justin Wilson netted 2.1 WAR for the Tigers while Jeimer Candelario has thus far netted 2.9 WAR for the Tigers.  Combined, the Tigers have garnered 23.8 WAR for those players compared to the aforementioned 25.1 for Price, Cespedes, and Sora.  (Close enough to suggest a tie?)  Additionally, it is worthy to note that while Issac Paredes has not made the leap to the MLB roster yet ..he is considered a future everyday player depending upon which position he ultimately lands.  

One could also factor in the money value of the players involved.  Since being traded by the Tigers ..Price, Cespedes, and Soria will have been paid $271m through 2019 ..and still have another $134m remaining on their current contracts.  On the other hand, the Tigers will have paid Fulmer, Jones, Norris, Boyd, JCandelario (plus JWilson) approximately $17.5m total through 2019.  And all current Tigers are still under team control through at least 2022.

In summary, ..while I am not outright going to say DD absolutely won those trades ..I will say he certainly did not lose.  If anything at this time ..one could consider it a tie ..with the future to be the ultimate deciding factor.

 

And while I am at it ..keeping in mind other comments in this thread ..concerning Dave Dombrowski vs Billy Beane ..how many trades has Billy Beane won vs trades Dave Dombrowski has won?  My thinking is that since its been said that Billy Beane's boss typically refuses to spend big money on big stars ..preferring instead to trade his star players ..again, has Dave or Billy been better at receiving overall value for players traded away?  Without taking time to fully research ..I'd guess Dave probably has been better overall.  Just a guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DD did as well as you can expect with those trades.  

The thinking at the time, his words, was that it was a "reboot".  Not a rebuild.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Oblong said:

DD did as well as you can expect with those trades.  

The thinking at the time, his words, was that it was a "reboot".  Not a rebuild.

Call it whatever you want, but the fact that Dombrowski can trade established talent for prospects shows that he is not all about signing Free Agents, trading prospects, and spending tons of money in order to win.  He did it before when targeting young players in Austin Jackson and Max Scherzer.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bobrob2004 said:

Call it whatever you want, but the fact that Dombrowski can trade established talent for prospects shows that he is not all about signing Free Agents, trading prospects, and spending tons of money in order to win.  He did it before when targeting young players in Austin Jackson and Max Scherzer.  

Other GM's can do that too....  

of course.... trading prospects for veterans can bite you too.... as in the Alfredo Simon trade.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Oblong said:

Other GM's can do that too....  

of course.... trading prospects for veterans can bite you too.... as in the Alfredo Simon trade.

 

Right, Dombrowski is not flawless.  No GM is.  I can point out all of Billy Beane's mistakes too.  But just saying Dombrowski can only build off of trading prospects and spending tons of money is not seeing the full picture.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He actually demonstrated a very good job of acquiring young talent. I think we're better off with Matt Boyd and Daniel Norris vs. Willi Adames (the only real consequential pieces of that trade) and JaCoby Jones vs. Soria.

And when we traded prospects for veterans, we were almost never burned, save for Suarez.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

Because there is no evidence Beane wouldn't be able to succeed in more than once place.

Maybe he would or maybe he wouldn't - one can only speculate, but to say DD is better because of something that hasn't been tested with regards to Beane doesn't seem fair to me.

 It seems fair to me because beane had many chances to try his model out elsewhere and decided not to

EDIT:  And I never said that BB wouldn't succeed elsewhere, just that DD has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, tiger337 said:

Buddha did!

I was making a similar argument and agreed with buddha's thrust..... I didn't agree with or distinguish the point about the rings explicitly one way or another before, but I did when you made a point about it.  Is there something I did wrong here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sabretooth said:

 It seems fair to me because beane had many chances to try his model out elsewhere and decided not to

EDIT:  And I never said that BB wouldn't succeed elsewhere, just that DD has.

This is pretty strained.

It essentially says Beane has to be fired or quit a good job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tenacious D said:

And when we traded prospects for veterans, we were almost never burned, save for Suarez.

And I blame that on Al Avila.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

This is pretty strained.

It essentially says Beane has to be fired or quit a good job.

It's not a knock on him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, sabretooth said:

I was making a similar argument and agreed with buddha's thrust.

all the ladies agree....

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, sabretooth said:

It's not a knock on him.

If you are comparing two people, and giving credit to one for something the other cannot be judged on, it is a distinction without much of a difference.

 

Ultimately I really don't care much.  I think both men have merits and things that can be criticized and don't have too much of an opinion on which is better.

I also happen think the fact one has been in his role with multiple orgs is next to meaningless when comparing their CVs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      96,639
    • Total Posts
      2,910,425
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
×
×
  • Create New...