The Official Dead Horse Topics Thread

[Kimmi]

Kimmi, I was a Ben supporter up until 2015. And I do agree with you that he did a lot of good things.

 

The short version of why I think Ben had to be replaced comes down to this:

 

When you're the GM of the Boston Red Sox and blessed with one of the highest payrolls in the game, you can't finish last two years in a row. No matter what the underlying reasons and explanations are, that is a crushing failure.

 

Well, obviously I disagree that Ben was a crushing failure. I agree that the past two seasons have been crushing failures, but I disagree with where the blame falls.

 

At any rate, your response, even though I disagree with it, is very reasonable. And this is one of the reasons why I like you so much.

[Bellhorn04]

Well, obviously I disagree that Ben was a crushing failure. I agree that the past two seasons have been crushing failures, but I disagree with where the blame falls.

 

I didn't actually mean to say Ben was a crushing failure. I meant that 2014/2015 were a crushing failure for him. And thanks for the kind words.

[Youk Of The Nation]

Umm, and so I am apparently not part of this world?

 

Some people want it too much, and I am thus obligated to withhold it, lest I contribute to their neuroses.

[a700hitter]

But does that make him a bad GM?

DD has a much longer resume than BC. When DD was released, he was not doing a good job, but his poor job in 2015 would not discredit the preponderance of good work done for many years. BC had a very short tenure, the preponderance of which was horrendously bad which is why he was fired. He was doing a bad job. Unlike DD, he did not have an extensive resume with a body of good work to point to. At the time he was fired he was a bad GM. Maybe he could have become a good GM, but when he was fired the record of his tenure was bad.

[User Name]

I didn't actually mean to say Ben was a crushing failure. I meant that 2014/2015 were a crushing failure for him. And thanks for the kind words.

 

Ben Cherington was an executive with a small-market mindset handling a big-market team. That was the problem. He will find a job running a small-market team looking to rebuild, and he will excel at it.

[Youk Of The Nation]

Frazee deserves some leeway since he just won a World Series. One bad move is no big deal. Ruth is fat lazy bum with attitude problems anyway.

 

Wow, what a bizarre coincidence. I didn't even know it when I posted that, but today is actually the anniversary of Ruth's sale to the Yankees.

[Elktonnick]

I think that the only reason why Ben was not a real contender for the job is because he was not interested in the job. A major shakeup in Seattle has nothing to do with Ben being a serious candidate, had he shown interest.

 

You have the cart before the horse. The Seattle papers were saying that Dipoto was always the major contender and BC wasn't interested in the job because he wasn't the major contender. And Ben probably knew it.

[cp176]

Ben Cherington was an executive with a small-market mindset handling a big-market team. That was the problem. He will find a job running a small-market team looking to rebuild, and he will excel at it.

 

I'm starting to agree with most of your posts and that is scaring me a little. Not really but anyway, i agree with this. He was not the man for the Boston job. Most people realize that . The but is that he did a lot of really good things. I really think that for him Boston came way to early. I would bet on him having a successful career but shoving him in to the forefront in Boston was not what the proverbial doctor ordered.

[Spitball]

Ben Cherington was an executive with a small-market mindset handling a big-market team. That was the problem. He will find a job running a small-market team looking to rebuild, and he will excel at it.

 

I agree with this, but I believe there is much more to it.

 

I am not certain where things all begin and end, but some kind of intelligent restraint is trying to evolve in baseball. It is not really Money Ball but perhaps a new and necessary angle that virtually all teams will have a chance to embrace to at least some degree. It is the balance that the draft was designed to create. After 30 years of poor finishes due to small market frustration, the Royals are World Champions with a combination of several high draft picks and a few smart trades.

 

Tampa Bay Rays were the first team I noticed greatly benefiting from finishing poorly in this most recent era. They finished poorly, drafted early in each round, and generally drafted well. The Rays were building competitive teams in the strong AL East with a fraction of the payroll of the Red Sox and Yankees. They had figured out how to compete in an uneven playing field.

 

The Astros are now a competitive team after having finished poorly for years, drafting well, lowering payroll, and employing an analytical plan for moving forward. Theo Epstein and company in Chicago have done a similar job in Chicago. The Pirates are trying to build a successful story on a smaller budget. The Braves and Reds seem to be cutting payroll and hoping the same plan works.

 

I think Ben Cherington was trying to smartly build a successful franchise that was not dependent on outspending the competition. He recognized the need for a team with smart budget and a strong farm team as a base. He was using a small market design only because it was a responsible design. Who knows how the team's long run would have evolved if Cherington had stayed?

 

The Sox pushed out "new school" Cherington and brought in "old school" Dombrowski. Only time will really tell.

Edited December 27, 2015 by Spitball

[mvp 78]

Small market design (and results) with large market ticket prices!

[Bellhorn04]

I think Ben Cherington was trying to smartly build a successful franchise that was not dependent on outspending the competition. He recognized the need for a team with smart budget and a strong farm team as a base. He was using a small market design only because it was a responsible design. Who knows how the team's long run would have evolved if Cherington had stayed?

 

The Sox pushed out "new school" Cherington and brought in "old school" Dombrowski. Only time will really tell.

 

The problem with this position is that, whether it was Cherington's idea or not, the Sox did spend a ton of money on Hanley, Panda, Porcello and Castillo, and none of them performed.

 

And as MVP says, the Sox also charge the highest ticket prices.

[mvp 78]

It's great to have a top notch developmental system. However, when you can't supplement the MLB roster with good FA pickups, you'll struggle to see success year in and year out. Also, you need to know which prospects to hoard and which to sell high on.

[cp176]

I agree with this, but I believe there is much more to it.

 

I am not certain where things all begin and end, but some kind of intelligent restraint is trying to evolve in baseball. It is not really Money Ball but perhaps a new and necessary angle that virtually all teams will have a chance to embrace to at least some degree. It is the balance that the draft was designed to create. After 30 years of poor finishes due to small market frustration, the Royals are World Champions with a combination of several high draft picks and a few smart trades.

 

Tampa Bay Rays were the first team I noticed greatly benefiting from finishing poorly in this most recent era. They finished poorly, drafted early in each round, and generally drafted well. The Rays were building competitive teams in the strong AL East with a fraction of the payroll of the Red Sox and Yankees. They had figured out how to compete in an uneven playing field.

 

The Astros are now a competitive team after having finished poorly for years, drafting well, lowering payroll, and employing an analytical plan for moving forward. Theo Epstein and company in Chicago have done a similar job in Chicago. The Pirates are trying to build a successful story on a smaller budget. The Braves and Reds seem to be cutting payroll and hoping the same plan works.

 

I think Ben Cherington was trying to smartly build a successful franchise that was not dependent on outspending the competition. He recognized the need for a team with smart budget and a strong farm team as a base. He was using a small market design only because it was a responsible design. Who knows how the team's long run would have evolved if Cherington had stayed?

 

The Sox pushed out "new school" Cherington and brought in "old school" Dombrowski. Only time will really tell.

 

Over the years , the Red Sox have proven that there is not one model that fits all. It takes a solid combination of approaches to get the best job done. Much of what you have said is not debatable. People I think realize the importance of a solid feeder program. For a small market team unlike the Red Sox, it probably represents a much bigger lifeline. As for "new school vs old school", I don't know what that means. I think that both Cherington and Dombrowski both would agree that only using one way to approach a problem is not going to be successful. I have not read or heard anything to make me believe that either one of them was unwilling to embrace either new or old ways of looking at things if they were leading toward success. The disgruntled Cherington fans obviously want to think that Dombrowski has an "old way " of looking at things. He probably cares much more about winning as opposed to promoting one school of thought over another.

[Spitball]

You guys all make good points. Hopefully, Dombrowski brings the Sox back into contention without undoing too much of the good things he inherited. Peter Gammons recently wrote an article that gives reason to be optimistic.

 

http://www.gammonsdaily.com/peter-gammons-dombrowskis-gillickesque-red-sox-revamp/

[Kimmi]

DD has a much longer resume than BC. When DD was released, he was not doing a good job, but his poor job in 2015 would not discredit the preponderance of good work done for many years. BC had a very short tenure, the preponderance of which was horrendously bad which is why he was fired. He was doing a bad job. Unlike DD, he did not have an extensive resume with a body of good work to point to. At the time he was fired he was a bad GM. Maybe he could have become a good GM, but when he was fired the record of his tenure was bad.

 

I can't argue Dombrowski's success, but he left the Detroit organization in very bad shape, with no championships to show for it. Ben left the Sox organization in very good shape with a championship to boot.

 

I can get over the two years of last place finishes (and I don't even think Ben is largely to blame for those) because I understand and can see what the long term plan was, and I can see it coming to fruition.

[cp176]

A good read - thanks - there is a lot to look forward to.

[Kimmi]

Ben Cherington was an executive with a small-market mindset handling a big-market team. That was the problem. He will find a job running a small-market team looking to rebuild, and he will excel at it.

 

I'm not sure I agree that he had a small market mindset. IMO, it was more that he had the understanding of the changing dynamics of baseball's free agency.

 

Either way, it is much more difficult to be a successful small market GM than it is to throw the most money at every free agent superstar that you want.

[Kimmi]

You have the cart before the horse. The Seattle papers were saying that Dipoto was always the major contender and BC wasn't interested in the job because he wasn't the major contender. And Ben probably knew it.

 

I don't think that I have the cart before the horse. I don't remember reading anything in the Seattle papers about Dipoto being a frontrunner until after Ben declined the interview and the interviews were more or less completed.

[cp176]

Dead horse - old school vs new school. One alone does not equal a good school. I'm for good which allows us to take the best of the old and the new mix it up and come up with a successful outcome. There is no one size fits all. Once again - I'm pretty sure that both Cherington and Dombrowski are aware of this one.

[Kimmi]

I agree with this, but I believe there is much more to it.

 

I am not certain where things all begin and end, but some kind of intelligent restraint is trying to evolve in baseball. It is not really Money Ball but perhaps a new and necessary angle that virtually all teams will have a chance to embrace to at least some degree. It is the balance that the draft was designed to create. After 30 years of poor finishes due to small market frustration, the Royals are World Champions with a combination of several high draft picks and a few smart trades.

 

Tampa Bay Rays were the first team I noticed greatly benefiting from finishing poorly in this most recent era. They finished poorly, drafted early in each round, and generally drafted well. The Rays were building competitive teams in the strong AL East with a fraction of the payroll of the Red Sox and Yankees. They had figured out how to compete in an uneven playing field.

 

The Astros are now a competitive team after having finished poorly for years, drafting well, lowering payroll, and employing an analytical plan for moving forward. Theo Epstein and company in Chicago have done a similar job in Chicago. The Pirates are trying to build a successful story on a smaller budget. The Braves and Reds seem to be cutting payroll and hoping the same plan works.

 

I think Ben Cherington was trying to smartly build a successful franchise that was not dependent on outspending the competition. He recognized the need for a team with smart budget and a strong farm team as a base. He was using a small market design only because it was a responsible design. Who knows how the team's long run would have evolved if Cherington had stayed?

 

The Sox pushed out "new school" Cherington and brought in "old school" Dombrowski. Only time will really tell.

 

Thank you for this post Spitball. Very well said.

 

As I mentioned, the dynamics of free agency are changing, and I believe Ben recognized this, as does Cashman (or the Steinbrenner boys). Because of several factors, throwing the most money at superstar free agents is not the way to build a franchise that can sustain long term success. The Phillies and the Tigers are two examples of teams that might be in a long rut due to dealing with unmoveable contracts of aging players and a gutted farm system.

 

It has to start with young, cost-controlled players, and when you supplement through free agency, it should be with shorter term contracts, except for in rare occasions.

 

In the post steroid era, those long term contracts to players in their 30s are going to be even worse than they used to be.

[Kimmi]

Small market design (and results) with large market ticket prices!

 

The large market prices are on the owners, not the GM. A GM should not base his team building philosophy on what ticket prices are.

[Bellhorn04]

The large market prices are on the owners, not the GM. A GM should not base his team building philosophy on what ticket prices are.

 

I can agree with that. But the GM works for the owners. Red Sox ownership has maintained the payroll at a high level year in and year out for many years now - presumably some of that is to please the fans. No hardcore rebuilding years like Theo had to work with, with the Cubs.

 

A big part of Ben's mandate, obviously, was to field contending teams.

[Spudboy]

I can't argue Dombrowski's success, but he left the Detroit organization in very bad shape, with no championships to show for it. Ben left the Sox organization in very good shape with a championship to boot.

 

I can get over the two years of last place finishes (and I don't even think Ben is largely to blame for those) because I understand and can see what the long term plan was, and I can see it coming to fruition.

 

Could you elaborate on how he left Detroit in very bad shape please?

[Elktonnick]

I don't think that I have the cart before the horse. I don't remember reading anything in the Seattle papers about Dipoto being a frontrunner until after Ben declined the interview and the interviews were more or less completed.

 

BC was never going to go to Seattle. Dipoto was the nbr 2 candidate the last time out plus he was in their division. He didn't get fired from LA but quit because ownership wouldn't let him rein in Scoscia nor let him use analytics as much as wanted. That's it in a nutshell. Dipoto was who Seattle wanted in the beginning. Believe it or not. No one is going to change your mind about Ben.

[Elktonnick]

The large market prices are on the owners, not the GM. A GM should not base his team building philosophy on what ticket prices are.

 

Again that is both hogwash and totally unrealistic. The General Manager is managing a business and one of the most highly competitive businesses there is. Any GM who isn't keeping his eye on the market place, ticket prices and the number of fannies that are filling the seats and what his competition is doing will end up exactly like Ben Cherrington, on the outside looking in.

[Kimmi]

A big part of Ben's mandate, obviously, was to field contending teams.

 

No doubt. I think fielding contending teams while rebuilding is more difficult than most people think, regardless of the payroll available. Especially when there is a directive from Henry not to hand out large contracts to the All Star free agents, in particular, older pitchers. Ben has acknowledged, however, that he was in full agreement about that.

 

As I've said many times, I can't blame Ben for the underperformances of the players. His job is to assemble a team that looks good on paper, and he did that. I know that Panda, Hanley, and Porcello are not in the same class as Price, but if Price pitches like a #4/5 pitcher this season instead of pitching like an ace, will that be Dombrowski's fault?

[Kimmi]

Could you elaborate on how he left Detroit in very bad shape please?

 

Detroit is currently dealing with aging players at the back end of large contracts and they have no farm system to speak of. This is what typically happens when the team is in "win now" mode. The team will be very good for a while, but they eventually hit that brick wall. Same thing happened in Philly.

[Kimmi]

BC was never going to go to Seattle. Dipoto was the nbr 2 candidate the last time out plus he was in their division. He didn't get fired from LA but quit because ownership wouldn't let him rein in Scoscia nor let him use analytics as much as wanted. That's it in a nutshell. Dipoto was who Seattle wanted in the beginning. Believe it or not. No one is going to change your mind about Ben.

 

The reason why Dipoto left LA has nothing to do with whether he was a front runner in Seattle. You have no way of knowing why Ben didn't interview for the job, and you have no way of knowing who Seattle wanted in the beginning. Seattle and Philly had an interest in Ben for their GM position. Believe it or not. No one is going to change your mind about Ben.

[Elktonnick]

The reason why Dipoto left LA has nothing to do with whether he was a front runner in Seattle. You have no way of knowing why Ben didn't interview for the job, and you have no way of knowing who Seattle wanted in the beginning. Seattle and Philly had an interest in Ben for their GM position. Believe it or not. No one is going to change your mind about Ben.

 

Never said that Dipoto quit LA because of the Seattle job. Dipoto quit because of Scoscia. Seattle preferred Jerry over Ben from the getgo because of the reasons I stated. The major difference was Ben was a failed GM who wasted millions of dollars on bad contracts and got fired for it. That's the difference.

[Kimmi]

Again that is both hogwash and totally unrealistic. The General Manager is managing a business and one of the most highly competitive businesses there is. Any GM who isn't keeping his eye on the market place, ticket prices and the number of fannies that are filling the seats and what his competition is doing will end up exactly like Ben Cherrington, on the outside looking in.

 

One of the areas of disagreement between Theo and Lucchino was with the baseball ops side of things versus the business side of things. Theo wanted players who would help the team win. Lucchino wanted players who would put fans in the seats. Winning is what puts the fans in the seats for the long haul, not the splashy signings. The GM is charge of baseball ops. There is someone else to take care of the business aspect of the team.

 

At any rate, my point was that the GM does not control the ticket prices, nor does he control the payroll. So, criticism of any GM for not signing a bunch of expensive free agents when the ticket prices are so high is misplaced criticism.