Checking In On Dave Dombrowski, Five Years After He Left The Red Sox

1 minute ago, mvp 78 said:

I'm not desperate and don't even believe the narrative. Does that sentence work for you? Has he replaced the GM/CBO/guy everyone here thinks is in charge every 4 years since Theo left? 

Fine.  My only point was to dispel the myth that Henry fires his person in charge every 4 years.   Again, twice.

And I stand by Bloom deserving it.  I think DD probably did as well, but I can certainly understand and recognize the validity in arguments that he didn’t..

2 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

I don't think he's going to automatically look at his watch in three years and go: TIME TO GET RID OF BRESLOW! He may fire him sooner. He may take another year. He may keep him on. Who knows? 

Like I said, I have no idea how insane or impulsive he is…

30 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

The fact that Dave Dombrowski was fired was very telling. 

Not always, but typically when you are very high up the corporate ladder you're fired behind closed doors and offered the chance to retire/step down/move on etc etc. 

To me this suggests, he had strong feelings towards John Henry's demands for budgetary restriction.

Oh to be a fly on some walls back in 2019.  Some of the conversations that may have transpired that will never come to light would be truly interesting to hear. 

I'd like to imagine this one happened. 

"Dave, he won't sign a team friendly deal, and it's going to put us under budget, you need to find the best deal for Mookie Betts you can"

"John, you're crazy, no one in their right mind would try to trade Mookie Betts without honestly trying to reach an agreement first.  I'm not going to trade you, you're going to have to fire me" 

The thing is, there was a report that DD was all set to trade Betts, midseason 2019, but the Sox started winning, and they decided to give 2019 a shot. 

I'm certain no GM would want to trade Betts, so I'm assuming Bloom was forced to do it, or told He'd have to cut $45-50M from the budget, elsewhere.

I think not being able to bring Kimbrel & Kelly back in 2019, and not given a penny to even try to replace them, might have been the beginning of the friction. I do think DD knew the Betts trade was on the winter horizon, and could likely have been the final straw in the relationship between JH and DD.

I honestly cannot imagine DD running the Sox under the 2020 and 2021 budgets handed to Bloom. I'm not saying he'd have quit, but there would have been some major acrimony that would likely have led to a (not much)  later firing or retirement.

2 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Are you actually trying to claim that Henry had nothing to do with Cherington leaving? 

That he had no idea Ben would quit upon learning of his replacement/demotion?  It was a total shock? 

There is an in between possibility: they knew he might quit, but hoped he'd stay and work under DD.

5 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Are you actually trying to claim that Henry had nothing to do with Cherington leaving? 

That he had no idea Ben would quit upon learning of his replacement/demotion?  It was a total shock? 

Come on.  We suspect Ben was demoted/stripped of responsibilities, but we really don’t know if that’s the case or not.  Or what his responsibilities would have been.  You’re speculating on his role and then deciding whether or not he liked it.  Maybe he left because of a new, reduced role.  Maybe he left because he didn’t like Dombrowski.  Lots of speculation here.

It’s either:

1. Cherington was to have his role reduced, possibly for reasons related to performance, or

2. Dombrowski is a control freak who insists on handling everything himself.  
 

There are reasons a to believe either or both scenarios…

18 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

I think Henry knew there was a very strong possibility he would quit.  Cherington had been in the organization many years so Henry knew him well and would have a good idea how he would take it.  

I agree. DD was taking control from him. Nobody in charge likes that.

This does not mean JH and others wanted Ben to quit, so I don't see it as being the same as firing somebody, but if they were pretty certain he'd quit, I can see thinking there is little difference.

10 minutes ago, dgalehouse said:

The situation when Dombrowski took charge in 2016 was not so different than it is today.  A need to beef up the bullpen and get a top of the line starting pitcher. Dombrowski made that his top priority. And the results were apparent.  Now, Breslow is faced with a similar scenario. As is the reclusive owner. It is pretty clear what is needed. Now get it done. 

Will Brez get the financial support DD was given? Does he have the freedom to trade several top prospects?

Yes, the situation is much different than today, but how different is knd of unknown, right now.

3 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

What we know is that Cherington quit immediately. 

Of course his role in personnel was going to be drastically reduced.  You don't bring in Dave Dombrowksi to just kind of oversee things.  That's not his profile.  He was a decision maker before joining the Sox and he's been a decision maker since.       

I think Occam's Razor applies here.

I think you might have lost sight of your original point (Henry fires ‘em every 4 years) or you have perfectly misapplied Occam’s Razors and given me something the exact opposite, which I suppose would be Occam’s Magical Hair Growth Tonic*.  
 

If Henry wanted Cherington gone, he wouldn’t hatch some plan involving hiring a control freak to usurp all Ben’s responsibilities.  His Occsm’s Razor would be to simply fire Ben…

*And Dessert Topping

6 hours ago, Hugh2 said:

This is my exact point, this story was followed with scrutiny in which I've never seen before, so we have nothing to compare it to.

Here's what I do know, I know what it's like to hire someone, I own a business and I hire people all the time.  I put out an ad and people apply.  In my experience when people apply for a job, they're typically interested in accepting it, although I have offered people a position who have ultimately declined, it happens. 

I would imagine, that if I went out and offered a position to people who already had a job, I'm going to get a lot more no's. I'm going to run into people who are happy where they are.  I would imagine that if I'm asking people to move their entire families to the other side of the country when they already have a job, I'm going to run into a lot more no's.  

Imagine you're in a sales position.  I'd imagine you end up closing a lot more deals where people COME TO YOU, rather than going out and trying to solicit business.  It's the nature of the beast, there are only 30 of these jobs on planet earth so of course you're going to have a wish list of guys you want, and I think it's natural that some are going to decline you if you're soliciting them. 

Think about this, was there ever a time when the open search for a GM/POBO was ever covered like this? When LA/NY/KC/DET/MIA/HOUS/MINN etc etc. went out and hired a new front office executive over the last couple decades were countless stories put out about every person they talked to and offered an interview to and was declined? I can't think of one, we have zero clue how normal what transpired was.  

But the media certainly had a narrative, and I don't think they really know either......so I didn't buy it. 

As I’ve said many times. With the 12th pick in the 2024 HOBO draft the Red Sox select Brez .

47 minutes ago, notin said:

I think you might have lost sight of your original point (Henry fires ‘em every 4 years) or you have perfectly misapplied Occam’s Razors and given me something the exact opposite, which I suppose would be Occam’s Magical Hair Growth Tonic*.  
 

If Henry wanted Cherington gone, he wouldn’t hatch some plan involving hiring a control freak to usurp all Ben’s responsibilities.  His Occsm’s Razor would be to simply fire Ben…

 

*And Dessert Topping

So kind of JH that he didn’t actually fire Cherington, but stripped him of any power, and then he quits. Forgone conclusion to me. 

5 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

This does not mean JH and others wanted Ben to quit, so I don't see it as being the same as firing somebody, but if they were pretty certain he'd quit, I can see thinking there is little difference.

I dunno why, but this post made me think of offering Bogaerts a one-year extension, when the other five best shortstops on the market were getting half-decades plus at new market value.

Maybe it was the same people in charge pulling the levers -- unless we all still believe Bloom was just an isolated D-bag (not Diamondback).

26 minutes ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

I dunno why, but this post made me think of offering Bogaerts a one-year extension, when the other five best shortstops on the market were getting half-decades plus at new market value.

Maybe it was the same people in charge pulling the levers -- unless we all still believe Bloom was just an isolated D-bag (not Diamondback).

I'm not sure what this means. 

1 hour ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

I dunno why, but this post made me think of offering Bogaerts a one-year extension, when the other five best shortstops on the market were getting half-decades plus at new market value.

Maybe it was the same people in charge pulling the levers -- unless we all still believe Bloom was just an isolated D-bag (not Diamondback).

I’ll go with all of the above.

16 hours ago, notin said:

It’s either:

 

1. Cherington was to have his role reduced, possibly for reasons related to performance, or

2. Dombrowski is a control freak who insists on handling everything himself.  
 

There are reasons a to believe either or both scenarios…

 

#2 was also speculated by some media members as a main reason Dombro was eventually canned...

... which, if true, may explain why Bloomslow may be directed by the lifers in the front office to shape recent rosters in their own images (where lifers = lifeless).

6 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

What he's saying is it's that there's a common thread between the Red Sox "offer" to Cherington and their "offer" to Bogaerts (and Lester before him).  And the latest of course is their reported "offers" to some personnel to stay on at reduced pay. 

It's just how they roll.

JH could have just let Bloom just stay on after hiring another HOBO, and let him do what he did best, which was pick up trash in the stands at Fenway.

8 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

From now on I will really try to make a point to say Henry replaces his CBO every 4 years instead of fires.    

Gotten by the word police.🙈🤭

45 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

"He wouldn’t hatch some plan involving hiring a control freak to usurp all Ben’s responsibilities."  

Man, that is a really unique way to describe DD taking over Ben's job. 

Anyway, from now on I will make it a point to say Henry replaces his CBO every 4 years.    

And all it took was a simple mention of Occam’s Magical Hair Growth Tonic and Dessert Topping…

1 hour ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

#2 was also speculated by some media members as a main reason Dombro was eventually canned...

... which, if true, may explain why Bloomslow may be directed by the lifers in the front office to shape recent rosters in their own images (where lifers = lifeless).

If DD was fired for being too megalomaniacal, it’s certainly not a reason he shared with the rather docile, timid Bloom.

Bloom showed us that while the meek might inherit the Earth, they’re still going to get fired for running it improperly…

30 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Epstein - gone - 2011

Cherington - gone - 2015

Dombrowski - gone - 2019

Bloom - gone - 2023

(4 championships among them)

Leave it to the Red Sox to produce such a bizarre numerical pattern even in the midst of being successful... 

 

How is that so many Red Sox leaders suck so badly enough in the eyes of John Henry that they need to be fired -- and almost immediately after they all land similar jobs elsewhere in the industry?

After awhile, even a megalomaniac staring down into a pond has to recognize the watered-down image staring back.