He was Jim Hendry's right hand man and there has never been any indication as to what he does well. So therefore, he must be bad at his job. The only grounds you use to assert this is that he worked under someone you didn't like. Great logic you have there. That's a pretty stupid statement. I questioned what he does well. I've never heard anything good about him. Nobody has ever made any sort of statement about what value he brings to the organization. I don't see it, and I'd like to know what it is. I don't just assume that middle management types in sports are great at what they do. I'm not sure why anybody would. You apparently assume they're bad at what they do. Far more reasonable. The close association and approval of Jim Hendry means it's not a baseless assumption. Maybe Bush is great but all I know about him is Hendry seemed to value him, which gives me some concerns. Concerns that are alleviated quite a bit by Theo keeping him. Maybe he embraced the new way of thinking and picked it up quickly. But anyways I guess O'Neill is the move talked about? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk