Jon Heyman has a lot to say

[Ceetar]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I don't see where Heyman's reporting the guys have been pre-fired. He has a source who's either right or wrong on what ownership's about to do and he's trusting they are right.

today he declared it official.

[Valadius]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Ceetar wrote: Other people are reporting that Omar hasn't been told this yet right? Sure, I doubt he'd admit it. But I find it suspect that only Heyman has it Omar's not firing himself, you know.

I wish Jeff Wilpon would fire himself, the sneering ass.

[Frayed Knot]

today he declared it official.

That could just mean that (according to his sources) a decision has been made (in fact, that's what I think it does mean) but that's not the same thing as declaring that all parties have been told that directly.
If there's one thing we know for sure it's that this NYM front office leaks worse that a Senate sub-committee.

[Ceetar]

Frayed Knot wrote: today he declared it official. That could just mean that (according to his sources) a decision has been made (in fact, that's what I think it does mean) but that's not the same thing as declaring that all parties have been told that directly. If there's one thing we know for sure it's that this NYM front office leaks worse that a Senate sub-committee.

I find it hard to distinguish what's a "leak" and what's a cleverly disguised "assumption" by a writer.

What ever Heyman said, it was enough to prompt other writers to ask Omar and Jerry directly if they'd been talked to by ownership. What was it today about the way he said it that made virtually everyone run with the story that it'd been decided, when similar such assertions had been mentioned for weeks? Final weekend of the season jitters/story wrapups?

Or is this just a back and forth between writers without much else to write about trying to get the first/best/most interesting story and leaving those of us that just want the cold hard facts with a mess of noise to filter through to try to figure out what's actually going on?

[Frayed Knot]

You're starting to lose me here.

Ceetar wrote: I find it hard to distinguish what's a "leak" and what's a cleverly disguised "assumption" by a writer.

A writer runs with a story when he gets info that he believes to be solid. He's not just going to assume for himself that Jerry & Omar are gone and write a story saying based on his feelings.

What ever Heyman said, it was enough to prompt other writers to ask Omar and Jerry directly if they'd been talked to by ownership. What was it today about the way he said it that made virtually everyone run with the story that it'd been decided, when similar such assertions had been mentioned for weeks? Final weekend of the season jitters/story wrapups?

Of course everyone is going to ask about it! Once Heyman printed (tweeted, IM'd whatever) what he did the idea that a decision has been made is now out in the public so everyone else who writes, blogs, talks, or just wants to know is going to ask if it is true. Also, another source repeating it doesn't make it twice as true because most of them are merely saying that Jon Heyman via SI.com (or via some other avenue) is saying so.

Or is this just a back and forth between writers without much else to write about trying to get the first/best/most interesting story and leaving those of us that just want the cold hard facts with a mess of noise to filter through to try to figure out what's actually going on?

It's not fact until it happens or until someone with the power to make it happen goes on record that it's definitely on. So until then it IS all writer speculation and/or back-channel info through un-attributed sources. None of that makes is UN-true, just not true YET.

[Ceetar]

I understand that a writer's not just making stuff up, but I do feel like they draw conclusions based on what they've been told and hinted at to create a story that they feel is readable or is breaking news. I grow skeptical of it all because it feels to me sometimes, particularly with Heyman, Rubin, etc, that they're looking for facts to fit a story they want to tell, versus finding facts and creating a story from them.

What Heyman wrote today isn't much different than what, say Adam Rubin, wrote earlier this week. Did Heyman just present it as more solid? And obviously once someone breaks something, everyone else will jump at it. But in this case no one else actually got any more information, and actually were told things that suggested it wasn't the case. Yet the general consensus on Twitter and around Metsblog/etc seems to be that it's pretty much a done deal.

I guess my confusions lies in that I don't really know what the facts are and what's actually been decided. Even I could've told you that we should stay tuned Monday for information, I didn't need Heyman to leak it and then reiterate all the other names that have been mentioned. And because there is nothing solid, it doesn't drive me to read what he's written about it, except when it blows up into a big deal.

[MFS62]

The original article already out of date because Mattingly DID replace Torre in LA.
Given that, Don Baylor is going to rack up a lot of air miles interviewing for those "12-15" managerial openings because, on a quick read, he is the only "minority candidate" mentioned (I may have missed others).

Later

[batmagadanleadoff]

It's very likely that Heyman has a reliable insider source within the Mets organization. Like him or not, over the past few seasons, Heyman's been the most accurate member of the media at predicting Mets developments before they happened.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Ceetar wrote: I I guess my confusions lies in that I don't really know what the facts are and what's actually been decided.

Well at least that's clear.

[Guest Edgy DC]

We've written far more words about the article Ceetar doesn't want to read than there are words in the article itself.

I think we can all safely assume that far more candidates than those mentioned will be interviewed.

[metirish]

If it means anything Joel Sherman says ownership OFFICIALY told Minaya yesterday that he would not be retained.

Sherman on what ownership can learn from the Minaya hiring.


Mets must allow next GM to be own man

On Sept. 30, 2004, at Omar Minaya�s introductory press conference as Mets general manager, two important pieces of performance art played out: Minaya acted as if he had a plan. And the Wilpons acted as if Minaya had unfettered authority to orchestrate that plan. The Mets can learn much from what occurred during Minaya�s six-year tenure. But they should start at that first day. Because either the next introductory press conference for a GM will be held in honor of someone with a real vision and the skills to execute it � skills that must include the backbone to demand autonomy in more than words � or else the Mets will end up revisiting all of their now familiar pathologies. Minaya officially was told yesterday by ownership that he will not be retained as GM at the conclusion of the season. My early favorite to succeed Minaya is John Hart, the former Indians and Rangers GM who now works as an advisor for Texas and a studio anaylst for MLB Network. Former Athletics GM Sandy Alderson and Gerry Hunsicker, currently the Rays� senior vice president of baseball operations and a former Mets executive, are strong candidates, if they want the position. I sense the Mets will prioritize credentials and gravitas as a way to change the subject from a recent past of front office missteps and, at times, near-amateurish buffoonery. Of course, the Mets were trying to do exactly the same with Minaya six years ago. What was in the rearview mirror, notably, was Art Howe�s soulless managing and the horrible trade of Scott Kazmir. Both came with Wilpon fingerprints: Fred Wilpon famously described the milquetoast Howe as �lighting up a room� in hailing the hiring, and Jeff Wilpon was viewed as the puppet-master behind the desperate July 2004 deal of Kazmir that was made to keep pipe-dream playoff hopes alive and avoid Shea Stadium attendance from cratering. The Wilpons mentioned the word �autonomy� at Minaya�s press conference as often as Fred Wilpon had used �skill set� upon hiring former GM Steve Phillips. What you realize both times was that these were buzzwords designed to give a perception. The Wilpons� no joke � had not asked Minaya for his vision during a five-hour �interview.� Again, it was about changing the subject quickly, not about substance. But did Minaya even deserve the autonomy � or the job? When asked that day for his strategy, Minaya did a lot of hemming and hawing, a quite familiar sound over the past six years. Finally, he said: �My plan here is to continue with the plan that�s in place. If I�m not mistaken, the plan that�s in place is based on pitching, defense and athleticism.� Of course, there was no plan in place � unless Cliff Floyd in left, Mike Piazza at first and Jae Seo on the mound somehow represented pitching, defense and athleticism. And Minaya never stuck to one plan. He oversaw a disjointed jigsaw puzzle that lacked the creative and consistent thinking necessary in the job. He was a nice guy miscast. Executives from outside the Mets would grouse about the lack of returned phone calls, the slowness in action and the lack of imagination to see beyond the one issue on the Mets� plate at any moment. The last big money spent during the Minaya administration served as representative of how things worked and, thus, how they must change. The Mets were fixated on adding power last offseason, though they had moved into a new park that emphasized the need for pitching, defense and athleticism. The organization put off all other items � moving in Jurassic fashion one move at a time while other teams were integrating multiple scenarios � until it got a power bat. Minaya wanted Matt Holliday. Ownership did not want to spend that kind of money, yet ended up overpaying on a four-year contract for Jason Bay, a middling defender and athlete. Besides misreading their needs, the Mets were, as always, dishonest about their chances of winning in 2010. They were not good enough to add a dubious, finishing-type piece on a long-term contract. Not when a player ideal for their park, Carl Crawford, was 12 months from free agency. But the Mets have lacked ability to self-assess and look at the big picture. Are the Wilpons ready to hire someone who will tell them hard truths � and to listen when those hard truths come? This cannot be about buzzwords. For real this time, the skills sets must be gravitas, vision, creativity and fortitude. If the Wilpons can find someone with all of that, here is an idea: Give him autonomy. For real. joel.sherman@nypost.com Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/mets/allow_next_gm_to_be_his_own_man_cwBvalTOckTfRW0eDVfdKP#ixzz11DL2iUmL

[ashie62]

I am going with Minaya and Manuel being gone, facts be damned!

[Frayed Knot]

My only question in the Sherman piece is this:

" ... When asked that day for his strategy, Minaya did a lot of hemming and hawing, a quite familiar sound over the past six years.
Finally, he said: �My plan here is to continue with the plan that�s in place. If I�m not mistaken, the plan that�s in place is based on pitching, defense and athleticism.�

My recollection is that Minaya talked not about continuing with the old plan but about getting back to a strategy of "pitching, defense and athleticism", specifically saying that that had been part of the Mets' history when at their best but something they had gotten away from in their recent past. I remember that because some fans jumped all over the 'athletic' label citing it as one more piece of evidence in Omar's evil plan to rid the team of as many white players in favor of more Hispanics.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Pitching, athleticism and defense was a Duke catchphrase as well, it explained his Cameron acquisition. The irony is Omar's signature PAD was to replace Cameron.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Everything about that Sherman piece just says that he's the type of guy that makes you prefer to go hungry at a party if he's hanging around the buffet table.

[metirish]

Edgy DC wrote: Everything about that Sherman piece just says that he's the type of guy that makes you prefer to go hungry at a party if he's hanging around the buffet table.

Brilliant description , I bet Lennon would be sniffing around him though, and tracksuit chugging back the booze for the courage.

[Ceetar]

Also, Matt Pignataro had the story a full day before Heyman did. But I guess it doesn't become real until it's somewhere that's not a blog.

[Guest Edgy DC]

In a sense, I had the story a month before.