Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Primate Studies > Discussion
Primate Studies
— Where BTF's Members Investigate the Grand Old Game

Wednesday, November 02, 2005

BTF Awards - 2005 Executive of the Year

Chicago White Sox General Manager Kenny Williams is the 2005 Major League Executive of the Year, according to a poll of the Baseball Think Factory’s scholars-in-residence.  Williams was named to five of the eight ballots cast, finishing first on four ballots and second on another for a total of 23 points. 

Cleveland General Manager Mark Shapiro finished in second place in the balloting with 13 points on five ballots. 

Atlanta’s John Schuerholz was named to only two ballots, finishing first on both, for 10 points and third place, while Milwaukee’s Doug Melvin earned nine points with three second place votes. 

Oakland’s Billy Beane and Detroit’s Dave Dombrowski tied for fifth with five points.  The Yankee’s Brian Cashman, who finished eighth in the balloting right behind Toronto’s J.P. Ricciardi, was the only other G.M. to be named to more than one ballot.  For various reasons, many BTF contributors were reluctant to cast ballots for Executive of the Year. 

In the fifth year of his term, Williams constructed a White Sox team that won the A.L. Central for the first time since 2000, led the American League in wins, and then won eleven of twelve post-season contests to secure the franchise’s first World Championship since 1917. 

Over the course of his tenure, Williams has received a good deal of scorn from BTF contributors, but he needs to be applauded for his contributions to the 2005 White Sox.  Going into 2005, Williams faced several crises: the defection of his all-star right fielder; the free agency of his 30-homer shortstop; an offensive and defensive hole at catcher; an uncertain starting rotation; a bullpen that lacked both depth and reliability; and the need to hold the line on his payroll.  Further, Williams and manager Ozzie Guillen believed that the team needed to improve their team’s defense and “balance” its offensive attack.

Williams’ boldest move of the off-season, trading left fielder Carlos Lee for outfielder Scott Podsednik, reliever Luis Vizcaino and some payroll room, helped solve four of his concerns.  Podsednik teamed with free agent signee Jermaine Dye to completely replace the team’s 2004 offensive production from their corner outfielders, while adding some much need on-base percentage and left-handed at bats to a lineup severely lacking both.  While erratic, Vizcaino, along with free agent signee Dustin Hermanson and Bobby Jenks, and fantastic waiver wire claim, contributed to one of the major league’s best bullpens.  Furthermore, the trade and the removal of Magglio Ordonez’s burdensome 2004 contract freed the organization to seize several solid players when they became available.

Japanese import Tadahito Iguchi, a second baseman, teamed with Juan Uribe to replace the production that the squad received from their 2004 keystone combo while bettering the team’s defense.  Payroll flexibility also allowed Williams to snatch up A.J. Pierzynski when he was cut loose, which helped 2005 team match the production that the 2004 team had received from their backstops, while adding an important left-handed bat to the lineup.  Additionally, two of Williams’s 2004 mid-season moves contributed greatly to the 2005 White Sox success.  His acquisitions of pitcher Freddy Garcia for three good young players and pitcher Jose Contreras for Esteban Loaiza gave this year’s rotation reliability, promise and cost certainty.  While no one should deny that fortune smiled on the 2005 White Sox with the unexpectedly rapid development of Jenks, Neal Cotts and Jon Garland, Kenny Williams should receive the lion’s share of the credit for the 2005 White Sox successes. 

Cleveland General Manager Mark Shapiro’s investments continued to pay dividends in 2005.  Although the Indians struggled through the first several months of the 2005 season, they surged after the all-star break thanks to Shapiro’s acquisitions.  The team finished second in the American League in scoring after August thanks to Shapiro’s sharp trading, which netted the Tribe Travis Hafner (for Einar Diaz), Coco Crisp (for 80 innings of Chuck Finley), Grady Sizemore (part of the package for Bartolo Colon) and Ben Broussard (for Russ Branyan).

Shapiro also made some tremendous low-risk free agent signings, including Casey Blake in 2002 (after he’d been waived by three organizations), Ronnie Belliard in 2004 (deemed a liability in the clubhouse, on the field and at the dinner table), and Aaron Boone during the 2004 season (coming off an serious knee injury).  Shapiro’s contributions also helped the team finish first in the AL in ERA after the all-star break. 

He also took advantage of the market to acquire starters Kevin Millwood (as a free agent after a disappointing 2004 season) and Cliff Lee (in a mid-season 2002 trade when Montreal was inexplicably desperate for Colon) and relievers Bobby Howry, Bob Wickman, Scott Sauerbeck, Rafael Betancourt and Matt Miller as free agents when their values were at their nadir. Shapiro’s rebuilding program in Cleveland has succeeded tremendously and should begin producing a string of divisional titles in the near future. 

Atlanta’s John Schuerholz and Milwaukee’s Doug Melvin continued to add to their resumes in 2005.

Schuerholz’s legendary career, which now includes 16 divisional and two world championships, was further burnished by his 2005 accomplishments.  Faced with the loss of his best offensive player and sixty percent of his rotation to free agency, Schuerholz clotted the flow by dipping into his rich farm system – first, to acquire starter Tim Hudson and then, when free agent signees Raul Mondesi and Brian Jordan proved unable to handle their designated duties, to assume a large share of the team’s offense.  By season’s end, Schuerholz’s system had produced contributors Adam LaRoche (25 years old), Jeff Francoeur (21), Ryan Langerhans (25), Wilson Betemit (24) and Brian McCann (21) and introduced up-and-comers Kelly Johnson (23) and Andy Marte (21) to the big leagues while fielding a division winner. 

When injuries and ineffectiveness decimated his rotation and bullpen, Schuerholz turned to rookie Blain Boyer (23) and then traded for Kyle Farnsworth to bolster his bullpen and stuck his magnificent waiver acquisition Jorge Sosa to stabilize the rotation. 

In Milwaukee, Doug Melvin, who produced three division titles in Texas during the 1990s, helped the Brewers to their first .500-or-better season since 1992.  Like Schuerholz, Melvin turned to his strong minor league system to fashion his team’s successes.  His system produced the core of the next fine Brewers team with the promotion of Rickie Weeks (22-years old), J.J. Hardy (22), Prince Fielder (21) and Bill Hall (25).  Melvin also had an eye for acquiring cheap talent.  In the spirit of his masterful past free agent signings, like Matt Wise and Doug Davis,  Melvin took advantage of market inefficiencies to secure starter Tomo Ohka (for an expendable non-entity) and Jose Capellan (for an over-priced and over-valued closer).

Other general Managers also merit our praise for their work in 2005.  Oakland’s Billy Beane continued his masterful work.  He traded his two best pitchers before the season but reaped immediate contributions from starter Danny Haren and reliever Kiko Calero in the swaps.  He promoted right fielder Nick Swisher, first baseman Dan Johnson, and starter Joe Blanton and closer Huston Street from the team’s farm system to solve other team problems.  In the midst of a rebuilding program and with the eighth lowest payroll in all of baseball, Beane gave the Athletics the tools to win 88 games and compete into September. 

In Detroit, Dave Dombrowski equipped the Tigers with solid rookies like Craig Monroe, Chris Shelton and Curtis Granderson and enough veterans to keep them around .500 into the last week of August.  And Brian Cashman of the Yankees deserves praise for his mid-season salvaging his team’s chances.

When off-season acquisitions Randy Johnson, Carl Pavano, Jaret Wright, Paul Quantrill and Tony Womack all floundered early, Cashman mined into the nearly-barren upper reaches of his farm system to strike gold with rookies Robinson Cano and Chien-Ming Wang and journeyman Aaron Small.  He then traded for Shawn Chacon, who righted the teams listing rotation. 

Toronto’s J.P. Ricciardi, St. Louis Walt Jocketty and the Los Angeles Angels’ Bill Stoneman also did a fine job in their 2005 roles. 

Anthony Giacalone Posted: November 02, 2005 at 12:52 AM | 47 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. Bernal Diaz has an angel on his shoulder. Posted: November 02, 2005 at 02:12 AM (#1715297)
Great stuff.

Who were the voters if you don't me asking. I don;t want to know how they voted I just want to know who gets to vote.
   2. _ Posted: November 02, 2005 at 02:17 AM (#1715303)
Eight ballots cast? Who ran this election, the Cook County Registrar? That's not anywhere close to a representative sample of BTF's "scholars-in-residence," is it? Not that I have a problem with the result; I'm just saying. . .
   3. Anthony Giacalone Posted: November 02, 2005 at 02:28 AM (#1715308)
It was eight out of twenty to twenty-five total votes, so, no, it wasn't very representative. I don't know who else voted exactly. I think my ballot was Williams, Shapiro and Beane. However, I can see great cases for Schuerholz, Jocketty, Melvin and Stoneman also.
   4. Шĥy Posted: November 02, 2005 at 02:30 AM (#1715311)
When off-season acquisitions Randy Johnson, Carl Pavano, Jaret Wright, Paul Quantrill and Tony Womack all floundered early, Cashman mined into his nearly-barren upper reaches of his farm system to strike gold with rookies Robinson Cano and Chien-Ming Wang and journeyman Aaron Small and traded for Shawn Chacon, who righted the teams listing rotation.

The only move Cashman deserves praise for there is the trade for Chacon. Maybe you could give him Small but I don't think anyone will argue that his success was anything more than an extreme fluke. How does promoting minor leaugers factor into an award for this year? That praise belongs to the year that they were drafted. Anyway, it's still crazy to vote for Cashman just because the Wright, Pavano, and Womack signings were so bad that nothing he did could make up for them.
   5. Mike Emeigh Posted: November 02, 2005 at 02:35 AM (#1715318)
It was eight out of twenty to twenty-five total votes, so, no, it wasn't very representative.

The draft ballot that I had didn't have Executive of the Year on it, so I didn't vote; it wasn't until it was too late that I realized we were even voting for an EOY.

Had I voted, I'd have voted for Schuerholz, Williams, and Doug Melvin, in that order.

-- MWE
   6. RB in NYC (Now with New iPhone!) Posted: November 02, 2005 at 02:37 AM (#1715323)
I was one of the Cashman votes. My logic was threefold: (1) I have absolutely no idea how much input he had on Wright, Pavano and Womack. Recent radio interviews have hinted that the first Cashman heard of Womack was when George caled Cash into his office to tell him Womack was on the roster. (2) In addition to the move for Chacon, I give Cashman credit for being, as again interviews and such have hinted, the voice of sanity, lobbying to keep the trade from trading Wang/Cano/others for patchwork solutions. (3) I'm a homer
   7. Harold Posted: November 02, 2005 at 02:38 AM (#1715325)
I wonder how differently this one would've played out if the ballots were cast immediately after the regular season rather than after the World Series. I'm not saying that they should've been; I'm just saying that it makes for an interesting contrast.
   8. JC in DC Posted: November 02, 2005 at 02:40 AM (#1715329)
No offense, but it's ridiculous that y'all would consider this a vote at all. Either get your 25 to vote, or give the votes to someone else. If as Mike states he was ready to vote but unaware a vote was proceeding, you've got serious problems. As it stands, it's absurd to claim Williams was the BTF EoY.
   9. Famous Original Joe C Posted: November 02, 2005 at 02:44 AM (#1715330)
Cool?
   10. Anthony Giacalone Posted: November 02, 2005 at 02:48 AM (#1715337)
Mike's votes would have bumped Schuerholz into a tie for second.

I don't know, Vinay. I have real problems with KW but I honestly believe that his moves gave the team five or so extra wins this season, which is a pretty good mark. I expected Jocketty to get more support.

As far as Cashman goes, I couldn't vote for him since his good in-season moves only made the team's horrible off-season moves less terminal. That said, determining when and which guys to bring up from the minors is a key job for a GM. Every year a dozen GMs leave guys in the minors while slackers remain on their rosters. For example, KW did a rather awful job of using his minor leaguers this year (aside from Jenks). He refused to use Gload, despite the fact that he needed DH ABs and shuttled Harris away (in favor of a rapidly fading Ozuna) when he could contributed a great deal and then played T.I.M.O. continually even though Anderson or Rosy Brown (although he would have had to make room for him on the 40-man) would have been much better choices. Cashman's moves took a lot of guts.
   11. mommy Posted: November 02, 2005 at 02:58 AM (#1715339)
choosing an exec of the year is completely ridiculous, as evidenced by the fact the intro cites moves these guys made years ago.
   12. Anthony Giacalone Posted: November 02, 2005 at 03:08 AM (#1715348)
Mommy, you should probably read the chapter on GMs from The Book on the Book. In order to fully evaluate a GM you need to look at their effect on single pennant races and their long-term decisions. Kenny Williams's moves in the from the middle of last year through this season probably did more than anyone else to help his team win in 2005. That said, Shapiro's moves from several years ago probably did more to help his team win than anyone else this year. Aren't both important?
   13. Andere Richtingen Posted: November 02, 2005 at 03:09 AM (#1715350)
It doesn't matter if you get a quorum or not. The entire concept of an "Executive of the Year" award for which any group of people cast votes is fundamentally flawed. The job just doesn't lend itself to this kind of evaluation, particularly on an annual basis.
   14. Anthony Giacalone Posted: November 02, 2005 at 03:16 AM (#1715358)
I'm sorry, Andere, are you suggesting that GMs do not affect the wins and losses of their teams on an annual basis? If they do, then they should be recognized for it. I'm not saying that we did a good job of it, but surely we could, in theory, measure how much a GM contributed to his team's winning in any given year.
   15. Maury Brown Posted: November 02, 2005 at 03:23 AM (#1715362)
I voted:

1 Schuerholz
2 Williams
3 Stoneman
   16. Joe Dimino Posted: November 02, 2005 at 03:25 AM (#1715365)
I think 8 votes is fine, it is what it is. That's how many votes there were for the Chalmers Awards back in the 20s and they still gave away the cars. If you don't like it, don't read the article after the first few paragraphs (where Tony explains that only 8 voted), but saying it shouldn't have even been written is ridiculous.

I voted and I had it 1) Shapiro, 2) Melvin, 3) Beane. After reading Tony's explanation, I think I could probably have been convinced to drop Williams in there also. I tend to like executives that build for the long-term as opposed to the one and done, and I think those three did more to set up a long run of success than anyone. I had Schuerholz 4th.
   17. I Love LA (OFF) Posted: November 02, 2005 at 04:10 AM (#1715395)
Riccardi!?!?
   18. Rob Base Posted: November 02, 2005 at 04:26 AM (#1715403)
I don't mean to be a fanboy, but Omar-Mi-Fcking-Naya.
   19. mommy Posted: November 02, 2005 at 04:57 AM (#1715430)
"In order to fully evaluate a GM you need to look at their effect on single pennant races and their long-term decisions. Kenny Williams's moves in the from the middle of last year through this season probably did more than anyone else to help his team win in 2005. That said, Shapiro's moves from several years ago probably did more to help his team win than anyone else this year. Aren't both important?"

yes, i agree completely, which is my point. you're voting for Shapiro as best exec of 2005 based on moves he made a few years ago? it's silly. furthermore, we can't completely judge the moves any of these guys made this season for a few more years.

i have no problem with trying to evaluate GMs, or even trying to rank them, based on several years of data. but an annual award is meaningless, given the nature of the job.
   20. The Underground Man Posted: November 02, 2005 at 05:38 AM (#1715455)
To people saying there "should not be" a BTF exec of the year award voted on by the BTF scholars aren't you speaking for a group of people you are not a part of. I feel like at best if you object the to the methods or the value of such an award you could say that. It's like if I made a website with a bunch of my friends and decided on our own executive of the year or player of the year or groundskeeper of the year and you told us it should not exist. That would be completely ridiculous on your part. It's up to whoever is making the award to deem whether it exists and on you to value it accordingly.
   21. Smyly Smile (Walewander) Posted: November 02, 2005 at 09:05 AM (#1715559)
Umm,I guess I shouldn't nitpick on the Tigers making a best anything' list, but Craig Monroe ain't no rookie.
   22. Smyly Smile (Walewander) Posted: November 02, 2005 at 10:00 AM (#1715572)
And sorry, Anthony, but the section on the Yankees reads like a trainwreck. Or like the Yankees' middle relief.
   23. The Underground Man Posted: November 02, 2005 at 11:28 AM (#1715593)
Ditto regarding the Yankees section. Did you write that or did the person who voted for Cashman write it because I think you should have recruited the voter to make sense out of it.
   24. Mike Emeigh Posted: November 02, 2005 at 03:06 PM (#1715673)
I tend to like executives that build for the long-term as opposed to the one and done, and I think those three did more to set up a long run of success than anyone.

The thing that impresses me about Schuerholz is that he maintains a nice balance between the short-term focus and long-term focus, which is (IMO) the largest reason why the Braves continue to be successful. I think you need the balance; you have to remain successful in the short-term while reloading for the long term. The Braves have done that better than anyone.

-- MWE
   25. chris p Posted: November 02, 2005 at 03:10 PM (#1715680)
why didn't lucchino get any votes for executive of the year!
   26. JC in DC Posted: November 02, 2005 at 03:22 PM (#1715700)
Man, some of you guys are ####### defensive. I won't speak for Andere, but my point is about attempts at professionalism. I have no problem w/people deciding to hand out awards, and I have no problems w/this site's attempts to be more "professional." But if that's your goal, proceeding with the results of an award that got only 30% participation from its "Scholars" is laughable. What you ought to do in such a situation is remind people of their obligation as scholars to participate in such things. But 8 out of 25ish votes is no quorum. Hold the results until you get your people to vote.

And can the defensiveness as well. Is that what this site is morphing into? A dual class site where criticism invites (from the upper class) invitations to go #### yourself or stop reading the article?
   27. Vida Blew Over the Legal Limit Posted: November 02, 2005 at 03:22 PM (#1715701)
I'm glad Melvin at least got some consideration. The job he has done there has been impressive.
   28. Anthony Giacalone Posted: November 02, 2005 at 03:25 PM (#1715708)
I don't really know what the metaphor "reads like a trainwreck" means. Was it poorly written? Was it poorly reasoned?

My purpose in a piece like this is to highlight the factors that might have gone into voting for a particular GM. It is not to judge whether that vote was good or bad. I will stand by that methodology. If you look, you will notice that I didn't criticize any of the GMs (except in the most passing fashion) for their bad decisions. This was supposed to highlight their accomplishments. I think that Cashman did a nice job in the areas that I listed.
   29. Lujack Posted: November 02, 2005 at 03:40 PM (#1715726)
So that's what the "Raiden" icon means...
   30. Sean McNally Posted: November 02, 2005 at 03:49 PM (#1715743)
I was one of the voters.

I believe my ballot was Shapiro, Williams and Schuerholz.
   31. Sam Hutcheson is the Rickey Henderson of... Posted: November 02, 2005 at 03:50 PM (#1715744)
I didn't cast a ballot for Executive of the Year, mostly because I didn't think about it. I voted on all of the player awards and the Manager of the Year. If I had thought about EoY I would have submitted something like this:

1. John Schuerholz
2. Mark Shapiro
3. Kenny Williams

s/
   32. Eugene Freedman Posted: November 02, 2005 at 04:00 PM (#1715755)
I voted for Dombrowski. I like where he's headed with the Tigers. It's not a question of great moves necessarily, but rather the direction in general. Signing Magglio was a bad deal, but a good move for a franchise that has been afraid of big players/deals since the Juan Gonzalez fiasco. It is important to show that the team intends to compete, plus Ordonez did hit well when he came back.

What he did with Granderson- keeping him down until he appeared more ready, and playing Nook Logan, who was terrific defensively in a big park was a great move. The deal for Polonco was a masterstroke and will pay off for years. I don't think there was a more effective mid-season deal.

While I was shocked by Carlos Pena's demotion early in the year it worked out. Shelton was superior to what could have been expected from Pena, he's younger, and when Pena was callled back up late, he excelled.

Giving Brandon Inge the 3B job was another great move. While he didn't appear to be capable of a full-time job, he was surprisingly very effective at the plate. I don't have any read on his defense.

The top 4 starters are cheap, young, and threw over 800 IP combined, with Bonderman, wisely, throwing the fewest.
   33. Andere Richtingen Posted: November 02, 2005 at 04:07 PM (#1715767)
I'm sorry, Andere, are you suggesting that GMs do not affect the wins and losses of their teams on an annual basis?

No.

If they do, then they should be recognized for it. I'm not saying that we did a good job of it, but surely we could, in theory, measure how much a GM contributed to his team's winning in any given year.

I'm not sure at all that one could in any reasonable way. Problem number one is that the job of a GM (or a field manager, for that matter) is far too complex and cryptic for us to evaluate as "best" from the outside. We can see the transactions made and put them in various columns, and perhaps even assign a value to each one, but we can only get a keyhole view of it. At the same time, while we can break player performances into annual periods, the GM's job does not lend itself to that. The GM's job is not just to add a certain amount of wins to the baseline in a given year, and I think the Executive of the Year award (and Manager of the Year) is generally a "Most Improved Team" award. I find that banal.

We can have discussions about the highest impact transaction(s) of the year, both positive and negative, and congratulate and condemn the GMs responsible for them, I guess. And for Kenny Williams, we can chalk up quite a few things in the positive column for 2005. But how many people who voted for Kenny Williams really think he's even a "good" GM on the whole? I don't. Maybe my keyhole view is wrong, and Williams will prove it over the coming years. We'll see. My keyhole view of John Schuerholz from 10 years ago was pretty critical, and I'd say that time has proven it distorted. Anyway, Kenny WIlliams has his reward for what happened in 2005, and I don't think an Executive of the Year award tells me anything at all about his performance/ability/record with respect to Shapiro or Schuerholz. This is trying to draw lines in the sand that don't need to be drawn.
   34. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: November 02, 2005 at 04:45 PM (#1715851)
I don't get a vote, but my vote would be:

1. Kenny Williams
2. John Schuerholz
3. Mark Shapiro
   35. Mister High Standards Posted: November 02, 2005 at 05:26 PM (#1715925)
My vote was:

1) Kenny Williams
2) Doug Melvin
3) Billy Beane

Maybe Danny will realize I'm not a Beane basher.
   36. tribefan Posted: November 02, 2005 at 05:34 PM (#1715942)
you're voting for Shapiro as best exec of 2005 based on moves he made a few years ago? it's silly.

Fair point, however I can see justifying an award like this based on an executive having a long-term plan and actually sticking to it over the course of several years. Shapiro certainly has done that in several ways, the most notable to me being that he did not trade away any of his young players to try to make a run at the AL Central in 2005. As it turns out, they ended up making a run anyway.

Still don't get the Aaron Boone thing though...
   37. tribefan Posted: November 02, 2005 at 05:37 PM (#1715953)
He also took advantage of the market to acquire starters Kevin Millwood (as a free agent after a disappointing 2004 season)

Also worth noting in regards to Millwood, most teams weren't offering much to him based on his injury history, but Shapiro structured the contract with very little risk to the team, and mostly incentives based on performance. He turned out to be the best pitcher on the staff this season.
   38. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: November 02, 2005 at 06:46 PM (#1716107)
Schuerholz named on only two of the ten ballots? Yikes. Doesn't say much for the voters. I guess no one noticed JS rebuilt the Braves pitching staff by getting Hudson, Sosa and Farnsworth for virtually nothing.
   39. _ Posted: November 02, 2005 at 06:58 PM (#1716143)
The real Andere is a Baseball Scholar, and I don't know whether he actually voted, but by the definition outlined above he apparently IS allowed to criticize this process, unlike the rest of you. . .
   40. Maury Brown Posted: November 02, 2005 at 07:01 PM (#1716154)
Schuerholz named on only two of the ten ballots? Yikes. Doesn't say much for the voters. I guess no one noticed JS rebuilt the Braves pitching staff by getting Hudson, Sosa and Farnsworth for virtually nothing.

Send the check to...

Main reason he got the top vote from me.
   41. RP Posted: November 02, 2005 at 07:11 PM (#1716187)
Schuerholz named on only two of the ten ballots?

I see a three fold problem for Schuerholz in this sort of ranking: (a) he's a victim of his own success (call it the Mantle or Mays syndrome), (b) he actually made some questionable moves this year, e.g., Jordan and Kolb, and (c) it's hard to separate his contribution from Cox (and maybe Mazzone).

And why are people complaining about the methodology they used for this award? What a waste of time.
   42. Maury Brown Posted: November 02, 2005 at 07:16 PM (#1716206)
In discussions, it should be noted that while the name on this is "Executive Award" it's technically a "GM Award"

If owners were in the mix, I'd have probably thrown in my vote for Attanasio.
   43. Andere Richtingen Posted: November 03, 2005 at 12:31 AM (#1716916)
The real Andere is a Baseball Scholar, and I don't know whether he actually voted, but by the definition outlined above he apparently IS allowed to criticize this process, unlike the rest of you. . .

Actually (I checked) the real Andere isn't, which is probably an oversight, but an insignificant one since the real Andere has written a sum total of two articles and doesn't have the keys, to his knowledge. So, no I did not vote, probably wasn't asked to (unless I missed the email) and I probably wouldn't have.

However, I am quite sure that anyone with a mortar board is entitled to voice all of the dissent they want. I would, however, speculate that the low turnout reflects a real lack of interest in the Executive of the Year award, which I futher speculate to come from a common lack of faith in it meaning anything.

I also hope I didn't come across as dismissive of Anthony's well-written and interesting discussion of the accomplishments of the various GMs in the intro. I have no problem with discussing that sort of thing, it's just the rankings and awards that I find worthless. Same with Manager of the Year.
   44. Anthony Giacalone Posted: November 03, 2005 at 12:36 AM (#1716926)
No offense taken, Andere. I understand your position and respect your stance.
   45. Joe Dimino Posted: November 03, 2005 at 11:51 AM (#1717361)
" A dual class site where criticism invites (from the upper class) invitations to go #### yourself or stop reading the article? "

I guess this was directed at me.

First, who is getting defensive here? :-)

Second, criticism of the article itself, the votes, etc., is perfectly reasonable, and welcomed. But why is it unreasonable for us to defend ourselves against that criticism if we don't agree with it?

Third, I never told anyone to go #### themselves, that's just riduculous, and it's putting words in my mouth, and I take offense to it. I stand by the comment, if you don't like the concept or the number of voters move on. We did it, we'll do it again next year most likely, and if you don't like the concept don't read it (again, I'm not referring to criticism of the content, votes, etc. here when I say if you don't like it - I mean if you don't like the existence of the award itself). I also don't understand why you are so hung up on the number of voters. We post things we're interested in on this site, and enough of us were interested in voting and someone wanted to write an article, so here it is. To say we shouldn't do something we want to do because you don't think it's a sound idea is awfully presumptous on your part, no?
   46. Joe Dimino Posted: November 03, 2005 at 11:57 AM (#1717362)
Andre - my previous comment was not directed at you. You gave reasons why you think it's tough to evaluate, etc., some of which I agree with. JC just blabbed that we only had 8 voters so it's riduculous to vote, talking about our own internal process, etc., and then said I told everyone to go #### themselves . . . that's what I was responding to.
   47. outoftownscoreboard Posted: November 11, 2005 at 08:46 AM (#1727513)
Signing Jermaine Dye when/where/why/and for how much he did by K.W. was brilliant. (eching anyone who has already pointed it out)..

:*)

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Eugene Freedman
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets.

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets.

Page rendered in 0.5645 seconds
49 querie(s) executed