Who's gonna be the General Manager?

[metirish]

Edgy MD wrote: "Money for old rope."

My understanding of this phrase is from the hangman that did the rounds throughout Britain and Ireland , after he did his job he often sold the rope used for the hanging

[Benjamin Grimm]

If that's the case then maybe they should hire Chain Boom.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Mike Puma wrote: Add Mike Chernoff to the list of established baseball executives saying, “Thanks, but no thanks” to the Mets. The Indians general manager has informed team officials of his intent to remain in Cleveland, according to an industry source, and not pursue the Mets’ opening for a head of baseball operations, replacing Sandy Alderson.

https://nypost.com/2018/10/14/another-established-baseball-executive-turns-mets-down/

[Benjamin Grimm]

A more appropriate title for this thread might be "Who's NOT gonna be the General Manager?"

At this point, I think I'm rooting for Ng or Bloom.

[batmagadanleadoff]

I don't see how anybody would want to be the Mets GM. Obviously, I don't mean that literally --- the Mets'll get somebody in the end. There aren't very many GM openings that come up in any given year, and the position is prestigious and high-paying. But I don't see how any candidate who thinks he might get a similar gig with another team down the line would want the Mets job. He'd be working for a tyrannical meddler in Jeff Wilpon and every baseball insider knows just what a colossal douchebag he is. And then he'd get the worst aspects of working in a large market --- the hyper intense scrutiny of a huge fan base and large media presence -- large markets generally mean more stupid fans and asshole media personalities ------ but without any of the advantages of a large market because the Mets are cash strapped and cheapskates on top of that who don't participate in the free agent market the way they ought to --- instead signing past their prime Joe Palooka free agents on the hail mary miracle plan. Any candidate with clout and a track record just ain't coming here. And if the candidate has clout and a track record, that means he done good somewhere else. This is mirroring the Mets managerial search of last off season. This doesn't mean the Mets won't sign a good GM in the end, but they have obstacles to landing a good one.

[Edgy MD]

I would love to be the Mets GM.

I've already slept with a LOT of people to better position myself.

Like, a LOT.

[Centerfield]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: A more appropriate title for this thread might be "Who's NOT gonna be the General Manager?" At this point, I think I'm rooting for Ng or Bloom.

Me too.

If I could pick, I’d go Bloom first. He seems to be dedicated to an analytic approach.

Not sure if Ng is analytics driven as well, but I think that this would be a tough job for her. As the first woman GM and the first Asian American GM, I would want her to have some success. Unfortunately I feel like the Mets GM position is a setup for failure.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

its incredibly disappointing to hear they can't come to as much as a decision to hire a baseball CEO and a COO, or just one, as it is to know they don't know what kind of people they need, and old school scout or a pocket protector nerd.

in the end you'll know that they'll be influenced by the debate -- and so whatever they do they will do for all the wrong reasons, to make a show oneed. in fact I don't doubt that these stories are to a degree plants to take the temperature of the fans.

[Ceetar]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: its incredibly disappointing to hear they can't come to as much as a decision to hire a baseball CEO and a COO, or just one, as it is to know they don't know what kind of people they need, and old school scout or a pocket protector nerd. in the end you'll know that they'll be influenced by the debate -- and so whatever they do they will do for all the wrong reasons, to make a show oneed. in fact I don't doubt that these stories are to a degree plants to take the temperature of the fans.

Hopefully they'll be influenced most by the candidates, the up in your face "This is how I bring you the parade" stuff. And hopefully the guy peddling it the best it's a huckster. "We're gonna bring in the best guys, just the best guys, to work with our guys and really grind out the wins" The Wilpons might be swayed by that bravado, but they've failed that way enough too that maybe it won't be enough over the well-prepared candidate citing stats and angles.

My guess as to the first part is that they really only want to hire one person, more in fear of being criticized for the "too many GMs" nonsense that's dumb because everyone does that, and less in the "I want to meddle more" because he's the owner and like all owners, will and can meddle no matter who they hire. I think they're just leaving the door open in case they really love two candidates or one demands that higher role, or demands to bring in his own GM or something like that.

That's gotta be a tough sell though. You can't really interview someone for a GM job and tell them it might be the GM job in charge of it all, or it might be second fiddle to a president type role.

[Centerfield]

In addition to Chernoff, it looks like Dodgers VP Josh Byrnes also took a pass. I didn't even know we were in on him.

The 37-year-old Chernoff, who grew up in New Jersey — his father, Mark, is in charge of WFAN’s programming — joins former Red Sox GM Ben Cherington and Twins GM Thad Levine among potential candidates who have told the Mets they are not interested. And The Post’s Joel Sherman reported Sunday that Dodgers vice president of baseball operations Josh Byrnes also won’t interview with the Mets. Among the issues, according to sources, is the perception that team COO Jeff Wilpon will run the baseball operations department, with the new hire as the real No. 2 in the organization.

https://nypost.com/2018/10/14/another-established-baseball-executive-turns-mets-down/

Who knows how this will play out, but the article ends by suggesting that Melvin and LaRocque, the old guys, seem to have the inside track.

[Ceetar]

I'm not convinced some of these guys were even actual candidates rather than media candidates. Byrnes interviewed last time right?

Does this count as 'reporting'. Sherman called Byrnes and asked if he had an interview. He said no. I could call you and ask you that, is that reporting or in any way useful information? Maybe all this bs about no one wanting to interview with the Mets is because the media is running around asking guys they're not interviewing if they're interviewing and getting 'no' responses. "Haha, look at all these guys that don't want to work for the Mets! Never mind that the Mets didn't really consider them either!"

[metirish]

Ceetar wrote: I'm not convinced some of these guys were even actual candidates rather than media candidates. Byrnes interviewed last time right? Does this count as 'reporting'. Sherman called Byrnes and asked if he had an interview. He said no. I could call you and ask you that, is that reporting or in any way useful information? Maybe all this bs about no one wanting to interview with the Mets is because the media is running around asking guys they're not interviewing if they're interviewing and getting 'no' responses. "Haha, look at all these guys that don't want to work for the Mets! Never mind that the Mets didn't really consider them either!"

yeah, the local writers really are reveling in reporting that no one wants the job , it all looks awful too , Jeff really needs to fuck off away

[Ceetar]

metirish wrote: yeah, the local writers really are reveling in reporting that no one wants the job , it all looks awful too , Jeff really needs to fuck off away

Well i mean, he's gotta be the guy that hires the new guy/gal(s).

It's lose/lose either way. There's no candidate that won't get criticized by some section of both the fanbase and media. There's no comment Jeff can make that will convince anyone he doesn't meddle nor will he admit that he does meddle (more than others). When he tries he ends up bashing Alderson so it's better if he shuts up, but then he's criticized for not talking enough.

I guess I'm just happy the media didn't bang down the door to chemo treatments to get a counter-quote from Sandy. Although I'm a little surprised they didn't.

[Edgy MD]

I agree that it's lose-lose. If he says he gave Alderson authority, he's a coward, if he says he didn't, he's a meddler.

We'll see how it plays out. I have my disagreements with Alderson, but if they walk away with someone I regard as highly as him, who has the juice that he had to allow for independence, I'll be over the moon.

[Centerfield]

I don't agree with the idea that Jeff is damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. He could, at any time, take responsibility for what he's done and change his ways.

"I'm sure you've all heard rumors about our involvement, some might call it "meddling", during the past regime. Look, we are looking for a wholesale change in philosophy. Our new GM will have full authority. Our only job will be to give him the resources that a big market GM should have, and that's what we'll do. Provide the bankroll. How he or she chooses to spend that, or not spend that, will be up to that person."

Then, you know, follow through and do it.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I don't think it's unreasonable for a GM to consult with his bosses before major moves, such as committing $300 million to a someone or trading a franchise player. So 100 per cent autonomy is probably too much to ask, but I agree that the Mets should hire someone whose philosophy matches what they're looking for, and give him (or her) the latitude to execute that philosophy.

[Edgy MD]

I have no idea, for the most part, what Jeff Wilpon has done. And if neither yes nor no is an acceptable answer, it doesn't matter. His best bet is shutting up.

Names I don't want to hear associated with the GM search: Bill Bavasi, Omar Minaya, Steve Phillips, Lee Mazzilli, John Franco, Dave Stewart.

I'm trying to think if I could plausibly entertain the idea of Ruben Amaro, Jr. (Hell, maybe he's been the designated successor all along, and has just been hanging out in the first base coach's box to get the lay of the land.)

There's some names I regard badly but have been associated with some success, like Allard Baird, and some I regard highly despite being associated with failed regimes, like Frank Wren. That's a hard fence to sit on.

[Ceetar]

Centerfield wrote: I don't agree with the idea that Jeff is damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. He could, at any time, take responsibility for what he's done and change his ways. "I'm sure you've all heard rumors about our involvement, some might call it "meddling", during the past regime. Look, we are looking for a wholesale change in philosophy. Our new GM will have full authority. Our only job will be to give him the resources that a big market GM should have, and that's what we'll do. Provide the bankroll. How he or she chooses to spend that, or not spend that, will be up to that person." Then, you know, follow through and do it.

No one would believe him if he made that statement. He'd have to be really fucking candid, and self-aware. I don't think he's capable of that.

He could not meddle AND not raise the budget.

To be perfectly straight-forward, open and honest about the budget he'd have to open the books, which he won't do, and I'm not sure he'd even be able to on his own. And then he'd have to explain, in depth, to journalists not finance people, which he's counting as revenue, what he's counting as expenses, specifically for the Mets, and specifically for not the Mets, and which loans are on Mets stuff versus personal stuff, etc.

And even if he did all that, there would still be intense criticism(and perhaps legal ones, though since no one cares about white collar financial crime anymore, maybe not) of how he decided allocate that stuff. Like if he doesn't count the naming rights for Citi Field under Mets revenue but counts the stadium loans as Mets expenses (I'm like 70% sure they do this). And of course, there's a good shot he only tangentially understands that stuff, as he has finance guys doing most of it.

And really, it doesn't matter. Even an off the record quote from Jeff that's something like "I always liked Jason Kipnis" would be considered meddling if it's printed even if he never said it to the Mets front office. Meanwhile Hal Steinbrenner can say he was "hot and heavy" in the Stanton negotiations and criticize his manager's decisions with no repercussions.

There is only one real way the Wilpons can get a little less heat on them. continued winning. That's it. A WS win will take the media heat off. For the fans I think they'll maybe tolerate one loss in a row, but that second loss in a row will be blood in the water, even if it's the two in a row after going 160-0.

[Centerfield]

I don't think it's unreasonable for a GM to consult with his bosses before major moves, such as committing $300 million to a someone or trading a franchise player. So 100 per cent autonomy is probably too much to ask, but I agree that the Mets should hire someone whose philosophy matches what they're looking for, and give him (or her) the latitude to execute that philosophy.

Of course. That's completely reasonable.

I'm thinking of exchanges like:

I think you should sign Jay Bruce.

Ok boss, but our analytics department suggest that Jay is on the downturn of his career, and his peripherals suggest that...

I think you should sign Jay Bruce. Let's get him.

[Centerfield]

Edgy MD wrote: I have no idea, for the most part, what Jeff Wilpon has done. And if neither yes nor no is an acceptable answer, it doesn't matter. His best bet is shutting up.

I think the truth is always an acceptable answer. And being accountable for your actions is usually a pretty good move.

[Edgy MD]

The point is that I don't know what the truth is, or what his actions are, at least as far as imposing on Sandy Alderson's role. I'm doing guesswork. Sometimes educated guesswork.

And I'm not speaking to what is an acceptable answer (certainly the truth is, whatever that may be), but what he has been damned for.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I don't think it's unreasonable for a GM to consult with his bosses before major moves, such as committing $300 million to a someone or trading a franchise player. So 100 per cent autonomy is probably too much to ask, but I agree that the Mets should hire someone whose philosophy matches what they're looking for, and give him (or her) the latitude to execute that philosophy.

What I was trying to get at above is, the Mets have no idea what philosophy they are looking for. They only want to appear as though they are backing whatever the "right" one is. This is the Wilpons in a nutshell. They are incompetent and don't know it.

[Centerfield]

I don't think it's unreasonable for a GM to consult with his bosses before major moves, such as committing $300 million to a someone or trading a franchise player. So 100 per cent autonomy is probably too much to ask, but I agree that the Mets should hire someone whose philosophy matches what they're looking for, and give him (or her) the latitude to execute that philosophy. What I was trying to get at above is, the Mets have no idea what philosophy they are looking for. They only want to appear as though they are backing whatever the "right" one is. This is the Wilpons in a nutshell. They are incompetent and don't know it.

Joel Sherman. Plagiarizing JCL.

The most important questions the Mets should be asking in their interview process for a new general manager are to themselves. Are they sure they know what they are offering? Are they sure they know what they want?

https://nypost.com/2018/10/15/empty-vows-alderson-back-stab-inside-mets-gm-search-mess/

[Ceetar]

I don't think it's unreasonable for a GM to consult with his bosses before major moves, such as committing $300 million to a someone or trading a franchise player. So 100 per cent autonomy is probably too much to ask, but I agree that the Mets should hire someone whose philosophy matches what they're looking for, and give him (or her) the latitude to execute that philosophy. Of course. That's completely reasonable. I'm thinking of exchanges like: I think you should sign Jay Bruce. Ok boss, but our analytics department suggest that Jay is on the downturn of his career, and his peripherals suggest that... I think you should sign Jay Bruce. Let's get him.

The analytics didn't, and shouldn't, have said that. Bruce's numbers were suggestive of him still being a pretty useful one-dimensional player. I still think this is an Alderson failing and not a Wilpon one. if Sandy was really against him it was really easy NOT to give him that much money right? If the Wilpons are as cheap and thrifty as the narrative said, selling Nimmo as the answer over him should've been easy.

Vargas was the one that was really cited as being bad analytically, but they also barely gave him any money and he actually was a pretty good fit for what Sandy claimed to be looking for. The analytics department advising (not telling) him that doesn't change anything, especially if Sandy really wanted a better analytics dept. Like, was it good enough to trust on this but not good enough as whole? Pick your narrative please, not just retroactively. And it's not like we've gotten word that the Mets really should've signed X starter over him. None of the starters were good. Did you like Vargas over Montero? that seems like a reasonable bet. But again, they could've just rolled with Montero/Lugo/Gsellman et al. There are so many logical fallacies in the damn ownership narrative it's hard to keep straight.

[Guest 41Forever]

I take Sherman with a grain of salt. His part about Calloway is silly. No GM is going to want to come in and whack a manager right away, especially one with two years left on his contract. I suspect someone coming in will look with a critical eye for a year then decide whether he or she wants to bring in someone of their own choosing. It's more palatable to eat one year of a contract than two. And while Mickey certainly had some bumps in the road, I don't think he appeared over his head. A learning year, for sure. But the team did rebound. I don't think we're in Art Howe territory.

I'm also not panicked at the pace. The trio is in place and we're not even to the World Series yet.

[ashie62]

Mickey Mouse Calloway is safe. Short leash, but safe

[batmagadanleadoff]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I don't see how anybody would want to be the Mets GM. Obviously, I don't mean that literally --- the Mets'll get somebody in the end. There aren't very many GM openings that come up in any given year, and the position is prestigious and high-paying. But I don't see how any candidate who thinks he might get a similar gig with another team down the line would want the Mets job. He'd be working for a tyrannical meddler in Jeff Wilpon and every baseball insider knows just what a colossal douchebag he is. And then he'd get the worst aspects of working in a large market --- the hyper intense scrutiny of a huge fan base and large media presence -- large markets generally mean more stupid fans and asshole media personalities ------ but without any of the advantages of a large market because the Mets are cash strapped and cheapskates on top of that who don't participate in the free agent market the way they ought to --- instead signing past their prime Joe Palooka free agents on the hail mary miracle plan. Any candidate with clout and a track record just ain't coming here. And if the candidate has clout and a track record, that means he done good somewhere else. This is mirroring the Mets managerial search of last off season. This doesn't mean the Mets won't sign a good GM in the end, but they have obstacles to landing a good one.

Baseball insiders know exactly what kind of colossal douchebags the Wilpons are and just how full of total shit they are about their GM hiring process and how much supposed autonomy the new GM will really get.

https://nypost.com/2018/10/15/empty-vows-alderson-back-stab-inside-mets-gm-search-mess/

[Ceetar]

Sherman isn't a baseball insider, he's an idiot.

All the post contains is unsourced opinions.

Literally "Someone that I won't named BELIEVES this to be the case".

That's literally nothing.

[Benjamin Grimm]

So what do we know so far? From what I've gathered, they've interviewed five candidates: LaRocque, Melvin, Watson, Ng, and Bloom.

I hate to say it, but Watson seems like the guy that they interviewed because they had to. Of the other four, LaRocque and Melvin are the old-schoolers, Bloom is the Young Turk, and Ng is somewhere in between. (I have a hunch that she'll end up being the compromise winner.)

It will be interesting to see who the Final Three are, if indeed there will be a Final Three (as has been reported) and if we get confirmation of who they are. If LaRocque and Melvin both advance, that could be a clue towards the Mets thinking. The same if Bloom is eliminated. I hope Bloom and Ng both advance. It might not be long before we learn who the finalists are. At least, I hope not.

[Ceetar]

There are others, i think they're doing more this week and I can't tell if the rumors of a "candidate we don't know" were subsequently leaked or not.