Ricketts' List of GM Candidates (Chicago Tribune)

[SouthSideRyan]

Maybe some of the older guys around here can enlighten me to what is bad about Ned Colletti. All I know is what I've read, or seen him do with the Dodgers and Giants. I wasn't even born yet when he was last with the Cubs. Given his experience and Chicago / Cubs ties, I just thought he would be a solid back-up plan if we can't land one of the big dogs. But the more research I've done, the more comparisons I've seen to Jim Hendry. Or hearing "cut from the same cloth as Hendry", which totally killed that idea for me. I don't want somebody that will be anything like Jim Hendry.

 

He signed Juan Pierre to a 5 year contract on purpose.

[Clem Fandango]

Ricketts on ESPN right now

[Clem Fandango]

Philosophy on new GM: Someone with strong focus on player development, analytical expertise, and comes form a winning culture

 

Do you have a list: Don't really have a list

 

Timeframe: Get it done as soon as you can after the season

[Clem Fandango]

How do you balance player development vs. free agents:

 

There really are no short cuts. You will be consistent through player development. Went extra mile on draft picks. If you find a free agent, be thoughtful on the kind of contract you give them and consider the long term effect it will have on the team.

 

Also needs to improve club facilities

[mookie]

Mmm. Not the biggest fan of Byrnes being on the list.

 

My list.

 

1. Friedman

2. Cashman

3. Cherington

4. Thad Levine

[Clem Fandango]

On Carlos:

 

Actions were unacceptable, blah blah blah

 

Are you open to him pitching for the Cubs again:

 

(Forgot exactly what he said so I'm paraphrasing on this) It's hard to say, but doesn't seem to think he'll be pitching for the Cubs again

[Scotti]

Buster Olney just dropped Billy Beane's name on Baseball Tonight. I don't know how seriously to take that, but it's another name no one here should mind.

 

Beane is an OWNER. The compensation involved in getting him out of that investment (and it's future potential growth) would be staggering.

[ConstableRabbit]

On Carlos:

 

Actions were unacceptable, blah blah blah

 

Are you open to him pitching for the Cubs again:

 

(Forgot exactly what he said so I'm paraphrasing on this) It's hard to say, but doesn't seem to think he'll be pitching for the Cubs again

'We'll cross that bridge when we come to it, but it's hard to imagine that happening.'

[Clem Fandango]

On Carlos:

 

Actions were unacceptable, blah blah blah

 

Are you open to him pitching for the Cubs again:

 

(Forgot exactly what he said so I'm paraphrasing on this) It's hard to say, but doesn't seem to think he'll be pitching for the Cubs again

'We'll cross that bridge when we come to it, but it's hard to imagine that happening.'

 

That was it. Thanks

[SouthSideRyan]

Buster Olney just dropped Billy Beane's name on Baseball Tonight. I don't know how seriously to take that, but it's another name no one here should mind.

 

Beane is an OWNER. The compensation involved in getting him out of that investment (and it's future potential growth) would be staggering.

 

He's a 4% owner of one of the least valuable teams in MLB. "Getting him out of that investment" involves selling his share. The potential growth is the only reason extra compensation would be necessary and it certainly wouldn't be staggering.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Maybe some of the older guys around here can enlighten me to what is bad about Ned Colletti. All I know is what I've read, or seen him do with the Dodgers and Giants. I wasn't even born yet when he was last with the Cubs. Given his experience and Chicago / Cubs ties, I just thought he would be a solid back-up plan if we can't land one of the big dogs. But the more research I've done, the more comparisons I've seen to Jim Hendry. Or hearing "cut from the same cloth as Hendry", which totally killed that idea for me. I don't want somebody that will be anything like Jim Hendry.

 

He signed Juan Pierre to a 5 year contract on purpose.

 

That plus Andrew Jones, Jason Schmidt, Rafael Furcal, and a 36 year old Ted Lilly. Basically, he was to the Dodgers what Hendry was to us, only he managed to land Andre Ethier instead of Carlos Silva for Milton Bradley and had the luxury of having Matt Kemp and Clayton Kershaw come through the farm system. If I were to put together a list of guys I'd want to take over, Colletti would be a step above Omar Minaya.

[Scotti]

Given the parameters (from a winning tradition with a commitment to growing through the farm, saber-inclined and preferably the GM that made it happen), the lists that folks have bantered about get whittled down to maybe two guys (Cashman, Friedman) and perhaps Cherington who skates in on the fact that TR isn't demanding that GM has had any real GM experience. Still, Cherington hasn't proven himself as a GM and Cashman isn't particularly known as a saber guy.

 

Byrnes--is a failed GM who couldn't build a winning tradition in AZ.

 

Hahn--isn't a GM, does not come from a "winning tradition" and his team is not known for building from within.

 

Colletti--isn't saber-inclined, the Cubs could finish the year with a higher winning percentage and the Dodgers were a sub-.500 team last year too.

 

Levine--doesn't come from a "winning tradition" unless the last year and a half count while the prior ten don't and he isn't the GM.

 

At the end of the day, it seems no one available really fits TR's parameters but Friedman and Cashman come closest with perhaps Cherington as an insurance policy.

[sneakypower]

Coletti threw Carlos Santana into a trade to save a few bucks in salary

[SouthSideRyan]

Worst of all, just look at him.

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/d9/NED_COLLETTI.jpg/200px-NED_COLLETTI.jpg

[snoodmonger]

Worst of all, just look at him.

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/d9/NED_COLLETTI.jpg/200px-NED_COLLETTI.jpg

 

Do you have any pictures of him that aren't distorted by a funhouse mirror?

[Scotti]

Buster Olney just dropped Billy Beane's name on Baseball Tonight. I don't know how seriously to take that, but it's another name no one here should mind.

 

Beane is an OWNER. The compensation involved in getting him out of that investment (and it's future potential growth) would be staggering.

 

He's a 4% owner of one of the least valuable teams in MLB. "Getting him out of that investment" involves selling his share. The potential growth is the only reason extra compensation would be necessary and it certainly wouldn't be staggering.

 

The reason the A's aren't valued highly is because of the stadium. When OAK gets a new stadium (in OAK or by moving) the valuation of the A's--and Beane's shares--should double at a minimum the team's value has gone from 157M to 307M from 2002 to 2011 without a new stadium. Teams' values have skyrocketed when going from bad stadium to good.

 

Forbes values them currently at 308 million. 4% of that is 12 million. He could sell his shares for 12M but he would not get the unrealized value--the Cubs would have to come up with that on top of a hefty salary. Again, the minimum future value would be double.

 

12 M (or much more) would be a staggering amount top pay a GM just in order to then sign him to a lucrative long-term contract. Aside from all of that, Beane isn't a free agent until 2015 (a contract extension that he signed in 2007) AND he doesn't come from a "winning tradition."

[SouthSideRyan]

Of course, you did just pull all those #s out of your ass. (Except the Forbes valuation)

 

You believe that Oakland will become the 6th most valuable franchise in baseball behind only 4 teams from the biggest markets in baseball and a team that owns all of New England???

 

You think a purchase of a 4% share of the franchise wouldn't take into account any progress made on the stadium and/or relocation?

[davearm2]

The notion that the Cubs will have to bribe Beane or anyone else to take their GM job is just goofball. Interest in this opening is going to be staggering. The Cubs will have their pick of just about whoever they want.

 

If Beane would rather own 4% of the Oakland freaking A's than come be the GM of an iconic big-market franchise with huge resources and virtually unlimited potential to succeed, then fine. Scratch him off the list.

[erik316wttn]

The notion that the Cubs will have to bribe Beane or anyone else to take their GM job is just goofball. Interest in this opening is going to be staggering. The Cubs will have their pick of just about whoever they want.

 

If Beane would rather own 4% of the Oakland freaking A's than come be the GM of an iconic big-market franchise with huge resources and virtually unlimited potential to succeed, then fine. Scratch him off the list.

 

I'm sure he'll have his reasons if he declines. He knows what's best for him-- not us. I'm not going to hold it against him if he thinks his situation is better/more satisfying in Oakland than our position is.

[davell]

The Billy Beane disciples are probably a better fit for us than Beabe himself is anyway. Other than getting lucky with his original group of young pitching, he hasn't done a whole bunch since. I'd take Friedman, Cashman, Theo and probably even some of the Hahn's and Cherington's of the world over him and not lose any sleep over it.

[Scotti]

The notion that the Cubs will have to bribe Beane or anyone else to take their GM job is just goofball. Interest in this opening is going to be staggering. The Cubs will have their pick of just about whoever they want.

 

If Beane would rather own 4% of the Oakland freaking A's than come be the GM of an iconic big-market franchise with huge resources and virtually unlimited potential to succeed, then fine. Scratch him off the list.

 

Yeah, just forget the fact that the A's have him under contract... For three more years. He's Billy Freakin' Beane and no contract can hold him.

[Scotti]

Of course, you did just pull all those #s out of your ass. (Except the Forbes valuation)

 

Uh, you mean like the value of OAK doubling over the last 9 years? That's just fact. Sure Beane can sell at the current value but he can't replace that kind of secure growth during a very long recession in the market or in real estate.

 

If a smart investor owned 4% of the A's in this market he/she would NOT sell it at face value.

[SouthSideRyan]

Of course, you did just pull all those #s out of your ass. (Except the Forbes valuation)

 

Uh, you mean like the value of OAK doubling over the last 9 years? That's just fact. Sure Beane can sell at the current value but he can't replace that kind of secure growth during a very long recession in the market or in real estate.

 

If a smart investor owned 4% of the A's in this market he/she would NOT sell it at face value.

 

If the A's are going to soon be valued at 616M at minimum (Holy [expletive] they are not), then why would Beane only make 12M from the sale of his shares?

[treebird]

Of course, you did just pull all those #s out of your ass. (Except the Forbes valuation)

 

Uh, you mean like the value of OAK doubling over the last 9 years? That's just fact. Sure Beane can sell at the current value but he can't replace that kind of secure growth during a very long recession in the market or in real estate.

 

If a smart investor owned 4% of the A's in this market he/she would NOT sell it at face value.

 

If the A's are going to soon be valued at 616M at minimum (Holy [expletive] they are not), then why would Beane only make 12M from the sale of his shares?

 

there not worth that yet duh you no nothing about hi finance

[mookie]

Oh dear lord. This is about to get amusing. Maybe.