Steve Stone Could Be Involved with New Ownership

[BDWeav71]

I would love to have either Mark Shapiro or J.P. Ricciardi, but both have pretty long contracts.

 

 

I agree, although id be happy with Depo, Shapiro, J.P, or even Kevin Towers.

 

J.P would be my top choice. I'd love to have the combination of JP, Wilken, and our payroll working together.

[sherwood921]

I'm still holding out hope that Colangelo finds a way to purchase the team. One question though, does he still own partial ownernship in the Diamondbacks, and if he does why can he go after another team and Zell can not?

 

I am fairly certain Colangelo no longer has partial ownership with the Dbacks. I believe he sold whatever he had left to Moorad.

[imb]

I like the term VOGM

 

also, when i read this, I saw the "Stone could" part, but read it as "Stone Cold" and I was like :headscratch:

[IWU_CUBS_FAN]

I like Stone in the booth because of how he tells it how it is, but for goodness sake whoever is the next owner keep him outta the front office.

[Magnetic Curses]

depo, to be specific.

 

ditto

 

more small words that nobody can read

 

i can read them. but anyway, don't want to start a big thing with the small-ballers who see depodesta's firing in LA as a chink in the sabr-armor.

Oh I'm sure Depodesta's VORGM was quite high. Unfortunately, in the real world, we also judge by results, which DePodesta lacked. Way to categorize anyone who thought DePodesta was bad, too. "Small-ballers." Good one. (For the record, I think Colletti is even worse than DePodesta, and is quickly cementing himself as one of the worst GM's in baseball)

 

i don't know how you can assess a GM in 2 years. but yep, pretty much what i was expecting. thanks for living up to the stereotype.

What stereotype is this, exactly? The stereotype of objectively judging someone by their performance in a job? He inherited a division winner, turned them into a last place team, and then was unable to hire a manager, which led to his firing. He might be OK if given another chance, but I'm not sure why he should be anyone's top choice.

I'm sorry I don't verbally fellate Billy Beane and his associates like you. It's ridiculous to imply that anyone who doesn't wholeheartedly worship and embrance every stat-minded GM candidate is clearly backwards-thinking and ignorant. Billy Beane is one of (along with Schuerholz) the best GM's in the game, and I'd have no problem making him the highest-paid GM in baseball if he wanted to come to the Cubs. But that doesn't mean everyone he's ever worked with is good at their job too. Next time, at least bring up someone who has had success somewhere, like Forst or Fuson

 

overly defensive, strangely paranoid, prone to fly off the handle at the very mention of depodesta's name, likely to read small wording because they like getting pissed off and being provided with an ample excuse to flame--you know, a stereotype.

 

2 years to build a system, construct his team, and contend year in and year out. how very pathetic and reactionary it was to fire him so prematurely.

 

depodesta bashers are ridiculous.

[10man]

I don't want Stone near this organization again, unless he's in the booth. I also don't think Cuban being a fan of the Pirates would hinder his ability to try and make the Cubs a winner. I'm going to go out on quite a limb and say that many owners, GMs, and coaches in sports weren't a fan of the teams they are with growing up.

I agree here. Take the players for instance; how many of those in the current 25 man roster grew up as Cubs fans? I don't think they will play with less effort just because they weren't.

 

If Cuban were to buy the team then winning would be his priority since that would benefit his ability to maximize on the investment.

[BigbadB]

I agree that DePo was let go way too soon. Very few GM's are going to get the results they are looking for in such short order.

 

The Dodgers were in need of change and DePo was doing exactly what that team needed.

[KingCubsFan]

depo, to be specific.

 

ditto

 

more small words that nobody can read

 

i can read them. but anyway, don't want to start a big thing with the small-ballers who see depodesta's firing in LA as a chink in the sabr-armor.

Oh I'm sure Depodesta's VORGM was quite high. Unfortunately, in the real world, we also judge by results, which DePodesta lacked. Way to categorize anyone who thought DePodesta was bad, too. "Small-ballers." Good one. (For the record, I think Colletti is even worse than DePodesta, and is quickly cementing himself as one of the worst GM's in baseball)

 

i don't know how you can assess a GM in 2 years. but yep, pretty much what i was expecting. thanks for living up to the stereotype.

What stereotype is this, exactly? The stereotype of objectively judging someone by their performance in a job? He inherited a division winner, turned them into a last place team, and then was unable to hire a manager, which led to his firing. He might be OK if given another chance, but I'm not sure why he should be anyone's top choice.

I'm sorry I don't verbally fellate Billy Beane and his associates like you. It's ridiculous to imply that anyone who doesn't wholeheartedly worship and embrance every stat-minded GM candidate is clearly backwards-thinking and ignorant. Billy Beane is one of (along with Schuerholz) the best GM's in the game, and I'd have no problem making him the highest-paid GM in baseball if he wanted to come to the Cubs. But that doesn't mean everyone he's ever worked with is good at their job too. Next time, at least bring up someone who has had success somewhere, like Forst or Fuson

 

overly defensive, strangely paranoid, prone to fly off the handle at the very mention of depodesta's name, likely to read small wording because they like getting pissed off and being provided with an ample excuse to flame--you know, a stereotype.

 

2 years to build a system, construct his team, and contend year in and year out. how very pathetic and reactionary it was to fire him so prematurely.

 

depodesta bashers are ridiculous.

I'm not really sure where I come off as "overly defensive" or "strangely paranoid" but I'm not going to be like you and simply resort to personal attacks and name-calling to get my point across. Word of advice: If you get offended by people reading something you post in a public internet forum, DON'T POST IT. Even if it's in small letters.

As for getting enough time to build his own system, very few GM's were as lucky as him to step in and inherit one of, if not the best, farm system in baseball. If anything, allowing him to build his own system probably would have ended up hurting him.

I know some people will point to some his signings as indications that he was a good GM. But that really doesn't tell the whole story, because Hendry has made some good trades while he's been here too. During his time as GM, DePodesta traded away the clubhouse leader on a division-winning team, while at the same time breaking up his late-inning bullpen which was the strength of the team. In hindsight, those moves might look OK but they weren't very smart at the time and suggest an inability to gauge the chemistry and makeup of his own team. Believe it or not, these things are important during a season for the players. And when he made that trade, he was supposed to be getting Randy Johnson in return, not Brad Penny, and yet he somehow allowed that deal to fall through. Again, good GM's get that trade done. Finally, he clearly mishandled the manager hiring process, as the owner eventually fired him over it. All of this suggest that he is a poor decisionmaker, not necessarily a bad evaluator of talent. To be a GM, you need both.

[Magnetic Curses]

depo, to be specific.

 

ditto

 

more small words that nobody can read

 

i can read them. but anyway, don't want to start a big thing with the small-ballers who see depodesta's firing in LA as a chink in the sabr-armor.

Oh I'm sure Depodesta's VORGM was quite high. Unfortunately, in the real world, we also judge by results, which DePodesta lacked. Way to categorize anyone who thought DePodesta was bad, too. "Small-ballers." Good one. (For the record, I think Colletti is even worse than DePodesta, and is quickly cementing himself as one of the worst GM's in baseball)

 

i don't know how you can assess a GM in 2 years. but yep, pretty much what i was expecting. thanks for living up to the stereotype.

What stereotype is this, exactly? The stereotype of objectively judging someone by their performance in a job? He inherited a division winner, turned them into a last place team, and then was unable to hire a manager, which led to his firing. He might be OK if given another chance, but I'm not sure why he should be anyone's top choice.

I'm sorry I don't verbally fellate Billy Beane and his associates like you. It's ridiculous to imply that anyone who doesn't wholeheartedly worship and embrance every stat-minded GM candidate is clearly backwards-thinking and ignorant. Billy Beane is one of (along with Schuerholz) the best GM's in the game, and I'd have no problem making him the highest-paid GM in baseball if he wanted to come to the Cubs. But that doesn't mean everyone he's ever worked with is good at their job too. Next time, at least bring up someone who has had success somewhere, like Forst or Fuson

 

overly defensive, strangely paranoid, prone to fly off the handle at the very mention of depodesta's name, likely to read small wording because they like getting pissed off and being provided with an ample excuse to flame--you know, a stereotype.

 

2 years to build a system, construct his team, and contend year in and year out. how very pathetic and reactionary it was to fire him so prematurely.

 

depodesta bashers are ridiculous.

I'm not really sure where I come off as "overly defensive" or "strangely paranoid" but I'm not going to be like you and simply resort to personal attacks and name-calling to get my point across. Word of advice: If you get offended by people reading something you post in a public internet forum, DON'T POST IT. Even if it's in small letters.

 

hahahahaha

 

i'm the one getting offended? doesn't look like that to me. no, i was afraid of someone reading it and wetting their pants over it. which is exactly what happened.

 

As for getting enough time to build his own system, very few GM's were as lucky as him to step in and inherit one of, if not the best, farm system in baseball. If anything, allowing him to build his own system probably would have ended up hurting him.

I know some people will point to some his signings as indications that he was a good GM. But that really doesn't tell the whole story, because Hendry has made some good trades while he's been here too. During his time as GM, DePodesta traded away the clubhouse leader on a division-winning team, while at the same time breaking up his late-inning bullpen which was the strength of the team. In hindsight, those moves might look OK but they weren't very smart at the time and suggest an inability to gauge the chemistry and makeup of his own team. Believe it or not, these things are important during a season for the players. And when he made that trade, he was supposed to be getting Randy Johnson in return, not Brad Penny, and yet he somehow allowed that deal to fall through. Again, good GM's get that trade done. Finally, he clearly mishandled the manager hiring process, as the owner eventually fired him over it. All of this suggest that he is a poor decisionmaker, not necessarily a bad evaluator of talent. To be a GM, you need both.

 

oh dear. if you think that 2 years is long enough to judge any GM, unless that GM happens to be named bowden, who is a prime example of a loser GM that probably has compromising pictures of someone important--then i feel bad for you. rather, i feel bad for the baseball that is unfortunate enough to be evaluated by you.

 

"chemistry", "makeup", aren't these words that people use to sound like they know what they're talking about when they don't? simply allowing for "chemistry" to be an issue when building a baseball team is stupid, as chemistry is generally only important in sports where there are meaningful, intricate interactions going on all of the time, not baseball.

 

and loduca is and was one of the most overrated players in the game, both on the field and in the clubhouse. the moves depo made were good moves, both then and now.

[KingCubsFan]

 

hahahahaha

 

i'm the one getting offended? doesn't look like that to me. no, i was afraid of someone reading it and wetting their pants over it. which is exactly what happened.

 

As for getting enough time to build his own system, very few GM's were as lucky as him to step in and inherit one of, if not the best, farm system in baseball. If anything, allowing him to build his own system probably would have ended up hurting him.

I know some people will point to some his signings as indications that he was a good GM. But that really doesn't tell the whole story, because Hendry has made some good trades while he's been here too. During his time as GM, DePodesta traded away the clubhouse leader on a division-winning team, while at the same time breaking up his late-inning bullpen which was the strength of the team. In hindsight, those moves might look OK but they weren't very smart at the time and suggest an inability to gauge the chemistry and makeup of his own team. Believe it or not, these things are important during a season for the players. And when he made that trade, he was supposed to be getting Randy Johnson in return, not Brad Penny, and yet he somehow allowed that deal to fall through. Again, good GM's get that trade done. Finally, he clearly mishandled the manager hiring process, as the owner eventually fired him over it. All of this suggest that he is a poor decisionmaker, not necessarily a bad evaluator of talent. To be a GM, you need both.

 

oh dear. if you think that 2 years is long enough to judge any GM, unless that GM happens to be named bowden, who is a prime example of a loser GM that probably has compromising pictures of someone important--then i feel bad for you. rather, i feel bad for the baseball that is unfortunate enough to be evaluated by you.

 

"chemistry", "makeup", aren't these words that people use to sound like they know what they're talking about when they don't? simply allowing for "chemistry" to be an issue when building a baseball team is stupid, as chemistry is generally only important in sports where there are meaningful, intricate interactions going on all of the time, not baseball.

 

and loduca is and was one of the most overrated players in the game, both on the field and in the clubhouse. the moves depo made were good moves, both then and now.

*sigh* Clearly, you get some sort of hard-on by trying to start fights over the internet. If you're just flame, then carry on and I'll ignore you in the future. If not, I suggest you immediately seek some type of social interaction in a real public setting, and a reading comprehension book. Judging by the way you responded to my past post, you either a)don't understand what I'm saying or b)Didn't really read it, saw the word "chemistry" and proceeded to neatly categorize my opinions and respond by making broad generalizations. Judging by your other posts, I'm thinking the latter. Regardless, it's really not worth continuing this "discussion" as it's just a waste of my time. After reading how you interpreted the points I made in my previous posts, you've completely missed my point about DePodesta, and I don't think you'll ever understand (or care to, for that matter).

*waits for Sulleymon to skim this post and respond with insults such as "smallballer," "Joe Morgan" "idiot" etc.*

[CubinNY]

 

hahahahaha

 

i'm the one getting offended? doesn't look like that to me. no, i was afraid of someone reading it and wetting their pants over it. which is exactly what happened.

 

As for getting enough time to build his own system, very few GM's were as lucky as him to step in and inherit one of, if not the best, farm system in baseball. If anything, allowing him to build his own system probably would have ended up hurting him.

I know some people will point to some his signings as indications that he was a good GM. But that really doesn't tell the whole story, because Hendry has made some good trades while he's been here too. During his time as GM, DePodesta traded away the clubhouse leader on a division-winning team, while at the same time breaking up his late-inning bullpen which was the strength of the team. In hindsight, those moves might look OK but they weren't very smart at the time and suggest an inability to gauge the chemistry and makeup of his own team. Believe it or not, these things are important during a season for the players. And when he made that trade, he was supposed to be getting Randy Johnson in return, not Brad Penny, and yet he somehow allowed that deal to fall through. Again, good GM's get that trade done. Finally, he clearly mishandled the manager hiring process, as the owner eventually fired him over it. All of this suggest that he is a poor decisionmaker, not necessarily a bad evaluator of talent. To be a GM, you need both.

 

oh dear. if you think that 2 years is long enough to judge any GM, unless that GM happens to be named bowden, who is a prime example of a loser GM that probably has compromising pictures of someone important--then i feel bad for you. rather, i feel bad for the baseball that is unfortunate enough to be evaluated by you.

 

"chemistry", "makeup", aren't these words that people use to sound like they know what they're talking about when they don't? simply allowing for "chemistry" to be an issue when building a baseball team is stupid, as chemistry is generally only important in sports where there are meaningful, intricate interactions going on all of the time, not baseball.

 

and loduca is and was one of the most overrated players in the game, both on the field and in the clubhouse. the moves depo made were good moves, both then and now.

*sigh* Clearly, you get some sort of hard-on by trying to start fights over the internet. If you're just flame, then carry on and I'll ignore you in the future. If not, I suggest you immediately seek some type of social interaction in a real public setting, and a reading comprehension book. Judging by the way you responded to my past post, you either a)don't understand what I'm saying or b)Didn't really read it, saw the word "chemistry" and proceeded to neatly categorize my opinions and respond by making broad generalizations. Judging by your other posts, I'm thinking the latter. Regardless, it's really not worth continuing this "discussion" as it's just a waste of my time. After reading how you interpreted the points I made in my previous posts, you've completely missed my point about DePodesta, and I don't think you'll ever understand (or care to, for that matter).

*waits for Sulleymon to skim this post and respond with insults such as "smallballer," "Joe Morgan" "idiot" etc.*

 

I think he's demonstrated pretty darn good reading comprehension. I think the Marlins were worse after getting LoDuca than before they got him. So much for the "leader" making a difference.

[UK1679666180]

If I was to guess who would make the next best GM, I'd go with Logan White (Scouting Director of the Dodgers).

 

I:

http://sportsblogs.latimes.com/sports_baseball_dodgers/2007/02/talking_with_lo_1.html

 

II:

http://sportsblogs.latimes.com/sports_baseball_dodgers/2007/02/in_part_i_of_ou.html

[jjgman21]

I also agree that two years isn't enough to evaluate a GM, but the team fell off a cliff. breaking his tenure down by transaction, it's pretty easy to see why.

 

first off, Depodesta is responsible for the much reviled Izturis contract. anyone want more Izturis contracts?

 

I agree that LoDuca is nothing special, but Jason Phillips, David Ross, and Brent Mayne at that time were not good at baseball, so that trade meant leaving the team with a black hole at C for a year and half while the prosepects developed. someone gives credit for signing Lowe, but giving a huge contract to a guy coming off of two years of 105 and 90 ERA is not exactly brilliant. nor was giving a huge contract to a 37 year old declining secondbasemen. plus at the same time he re-upped Perez, who fell off a cliff himself. two of the three happened to work out, but they weren't great moves.

 

the thing that is striking about this disucssion is how mistakes Depo made are just brushed over, even though the people brushing over have really ridden Hendry for similar moves over the years. Andy Sisco situation = Shane Victorino situation. Aram contract out = JD Drew contract out. Jose Valentin = any of the high power low OBP signings by the Cubs.

 

you can also say that chemistry, etc. doesn't matter, and for the most part it doesn't. but a dash of LoDuca traded, a pinch of Milton Bradley acquired, and a spritz of Drew signed equals losing market share to the Angels.

 

one last thing, perhaps the lamest argument in favor of a GM I have ever heard was crediting him for a single AB by a player who pretty muched sucked at the time he was acquired. Steve Finley, puh-leaz.

 

 

I really don't know how good a GM Depodesta would make, but simply because he is SABR/Beane discipile doesn't mean he would make a good GM, particurlarly when you factor in his short history as a GM in which is he was widely acknowledged to have trouble working with ownership, employees, agents and other GMs.

Edited April 7, 2007 by jjgman21

[jjgman21]

 

I think he's demonstrated pretty darn good reading comprehension. I think the Marlins were worse after getting LoDuca than before they got him. So much for the "leader" making a difference.

 

well as it turns out, the Marlins were a .500 club when they got LoDuca, and about 8-10 games over .500 during his tenure (while losing one of their best pitchers and their firstbaseman in the trade). so by your own rationale, looks like leadership does make a difference.

[Magnetic Curses]

 

hahahahaha

 

i'm the one getting offended? doesn't look like that to me. no, i was afraid of someone reading it and wetting their pants over it. which is exactly what happened.

 

As for getting enough time to build his own system, very few GM's were as lucky as him to step in and inherit one of, if not the best, farm system in baseball. If anything, allowing him to build his own system probably would have ended up hurting him.

I know some people will point to some his signings as indications that he was a good GM. But that really doesn't tell the whole story, because Hendry has made some good trades while he's been here too. During his time as GM, DePodesta traded away the clubhouse leader on a division-winning team, while at the same time breaking up his late-inning bullpen which was the strength of the team. In hindsight, those moves might look OK but they weren't very smart at the time and suggest an inability to gauge the chemistry and makeup of his own team. Believe it or not, these things are important during a season for the players. And when he made that trade, he was supposed to be getting Randy Johnson in return, not Brad Penny, and yet he somehow allowed that deal to fall through. Again, good GM's get that trade done. Finally, he clearly mishandled the manager hiring process, as the owner eventually fired him over it. All of this suggest that he is a poor decisionmaker, not necessarily a bad evaluator of talent. To be a GM, you need both.

 

oh dear. if you think that 2 years is long enough to judge any GM, unless that GM happens to be named bowden, who is a prime example of a loser GM that probably has compromising pictures of someone important--then i feel bad for you. rather, i feel bad for the baseball that is unfortunate enough to be evaluated by you.

 

"chemistry", "makeup", aren't these words that people use to sound like they know what they're talking about when they don't? simply allowing for "chemistry" to be an issue when building a baseball team is stupid, as chemistry is generally only important in sports where there are meaningful, intricate interactions going on all of the time, not baseball.

 

and loduca is and was one of the most overrated players in the game, both on the field and in the clubhouse. the moves depo made were good moves, both then and now.

*sigh* Clearly, you get some sort of hard-on by trying to start fights over the internet. If you're just flame, then carry on and I'll ignore you in the future.

 

are you honestly being serious? i was the one trying to stay out of the argument. you're the one who saw one word and messed the bed. i was being nice, and i think a lot of board regulars here would agree with that, too,

 

If not, I suggest you immediately seek some type of social interaction in a real public setting, and a reading comprehension book. Judging by the way you responded to my past post, you either a)don't understand what I'm saying or b)Didn't really read it, saw the word "chemistry" and proceeded to neatly categorize my opinions and respond by making broad generalizations.

 

how did i misinterpret this?:

 

In hindsight, those moves might look OK but they weren't very smart at the time and suggest an inability to gauge the chemistry and makeup of his own team. Believe it or not, these things are important during a season for the players.

 

only one real way to interpret that. believing in team chemistry may be important in little league. fortunately, once you get to the major league level, you play with professionals and words like "chemistry" and "makeup" become sports words, with little to no meaning.

 

Judging by your other posts, I'm thinking the latter. Regardless, it's really not worth continuing this "discussion" as it's just a waste of my time. After reading how you interpreted the points I made in my previous posts, you've completely missed my point about DePodesta, and I don't think you'll ever understand (or care to, for that matter).

 

why did you waste your time flaming the original post in the first place, then? why were you wasting your time with this last post? seems like you enjoy wasting your own time, no doubt you'll continue to waste your time by responding to this one, as well. we'll see how you don't like wasting your time.

 

make a consistent, intelligent post about depodesta and i'll talk to you like a big boy.

 

*waits for Sulleymon to skim this post and respond with insults such as "smallballer," "Joe Morgan" "idiot" etc.*

 

what was there to skim? i barely saw anything but a one paragraph jumbled-thought of a bitter post.

[10man]

Ahhh, I just love verbal tennis. Gets a little straining on the cyber neck after a while though.

[maandig]

Steve Stone's importance to the franchise was that he made Cub games more enjoyable to watch when he called them for the team. He is a good announcer and, before that, was a good pitcher. But beyond that, I don't understand the continued attention on his exploits or ruminations on any possible future he might have with the Cubs. Stone certainly understands how the game is played and can aptly describe the way action unfolds, but I've never seen or heard anything from him that evinces knowledge that would improve this team's front office.