In a well-run organization, the Owner/COO/etc hires the GM, the GM hires the manager with a LITTLE input from the higher ups, and the GM and manager work together to hiring the remainder of the coaching staff.
This way, everyone has some say, and it uses everyone’s knowledge accordingly.
Everyone (not just RDMB, I mean *everyone*) talks about who the Wilpons will hire for manager. But they SHOULDN’T be hiring a manager, the GM should be hiring a manager. And the Wilpons should only object if the price is too high. If they hire a GM and don’t trust him to pick a manager, why are they hiring that GM in the first place? That’s part of HIS JOB.
Let’s say I’m a GM and I get hired by the Wilpons to run the Mets. I know that Bobby Valentine is the right man for the job, but I run it by Jeff and Fred and they say “no way, we’ve already tried that, and we really just don’t get along – find someone else,” then I would be incredibly pissed and would immediately regret becoming GM of the team. It’s MY job to pick the manager, and unless the owners literally cannot afford the guy I want, I should have the say. I was hired to make this team a contender, and if the owners don’t let me do my job, then why am I even here?
Many will respond to that by saying “well then the Wilpons will probably hire a GM who allows their full input” and I’ll respond with “then this team is already doomed for failure.” If a GM isn’t allowed to pick his manager, then how much input will he have with signing and trading for players? I’m fairly certain that the Wilpons had at least *some* significant input on many of Omar’s failed moves, so if they’re allowed that same input with a new GM, then what’s the point in making the change? Sure, it could rile up the fan base, but if the team continues to lose, the potential rise in attendance will be incredibly short-lived.
In summation, if the Wilpons have anything more than subtle input on hiring any of the coaching staff or if they hire a GM who isn’t allowed to fully work toward his personal vision, I believe this team is in deep long-term trouble.
22 comments
metsfan4decades
9/28/2010-12:20pm at 12:20 pm (UTC -4)
Someone mentioned earlier keeping Omar for one more year. Is that because the Wilpons truly believe he’s the best man for the job?
Or…if that happens will it the result of not many qualified GMs with a head on their shoulders want to work for the Wilpons?
I sincerely hope some of the items I’m reading around the blogsphere are speculation and/or exaggerated. If true though, I think Prismo has a point. We’ve got bigger problems then who the next manager will be. Bigger problem being who – exactly – is hiring that manager????
stickguy
9/28/2010-12:31pm at 12:31 pm (UTC -4)
yeah, like the discussion on the other thread about do they get a Sr. BB guy 1st and let them reorg and pick the GM (or keep Omar)?
Until they actually announce things once the seaosn ends, and hire whatever new people they are going to (in whatever order), it is all WAGing by outsiders.
I have to assume they already have pretty much decided what to do (and have been discussing it for a while), even if they don’t know yet the specific bodies that will fill certain roles.
Mr North Jersey
9/28/2010-12:27pm at 12:27 pm (UTC -4)
That is why I am waiting to see what ownership does.
It is just too early to tell what this organization has planned other than discussing the idea of making changes.
stickguy
9/28/2010-12:28pm at 12:28 pm (UTC -4)
of course that is the way the process should work.
But, I don’t think the situation you describe is valid. For one thing, the GM will have a budget for the manager too. But putting that aside, Bobby V is a unique situation given the histroy and baggage with the team So in that case, I would give the wiplons a pass.
So, leave it at “you can spend up to $1.5mill/year, and it can’t be anyone that managed for us before”, and I think that is a fair set of parameters!
Prismo
9/28/2010-12:31pm at 12:31 pm (UTC -4)
Thanks for the criticism.
Bobby V was just an example…I could’ve said anyone. But I still think if they hired Towers (for example) and he said “I want Bobby V to manage this team – I think he’s the best man for the job” then they should LET HIM, because that’s his job! They could inform him of the baggage, but ultimately it should be his decision.
stickguy
9/28/2010-12:44pm at 12:44 pm (UTC -4)
I don’t think any GM has that much unilateral power. Same with some players (Manny, Bonds maybe, stuff like that). Guess you can lump them into special circumstances!
Prismo
9/28/2010-12:53pm at 12:53 pm (UTC -4)
You might be right, but ideally ownership would only dictate how much money the GM can spend in each area. They could discuss other issues with the GM (such as should a team focus on power or speed/defense), but the GM should have more say than ownership in that circumstance (because, presumably, he knows more).
kingman 26
9/28/2010-12:48pm at 12:48 pm (UTC -4)
Omar’s probably staying.
And Wally’s probably coming in as he is cheap and will buy a lot of fan good will for the least possible amount of dollars. And as he is clearly desperate for another MLB job, he will be controllable at least to an extent.
The idea of a Kasten or an Alderson is very intriguing, but probably fantasy.
Fred didn’t spend all of this money to let Jeff give up the power. It sucks, but this is Jeff’s baby, given to him by his dad, who thinks he’s doing a swell job.
This is the Browns in Cincy and the Dolans in MSG a lot more than it is the Rooneys in Pittsburgh or the Steinbrenners across town I am afraid.
The youngsters better be good, or to echo Prismo’s last sentence “I believe this team is in deep long-term trouble.”
Prismo
9/28/2010-12:51pm at 12:51 pm (UTC -4)
Remembering how enraged my fellow Knicks fans were when it was announced that despite being demoted, Isiah Thomas would remain in the organization, I can’t help but question whether the Wilpons actually think it would be different with Omar.
And like Omar, although hated, Isiah was widely regarded as a good scout of young talent. Fans still hated to see him remain in the organization in another role.
Omar should be gone, 100% gone.
kingman 26
9/28/2010-1:02pm at 1:02 pm (UTC -4)
I am very sad to say that this is probably a very accurate analogy.
Two years ago I laughed when people compared the Wilpons to the Dolans, and the Mets do have a lot more sucking to do before they can be compared to the truly horrific and mockable Knicks, but after the payroll and results the last two years, they are on their way…
But Jeff does fit the cliche which they supposedly say around the Garden, that Dolan Jr is called “Triple—because he was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple.”
GravediggerHebner
9/28/2010-1:36pm at 1:36 pm (UTC -4)
I agree with the premise that the GM should have the largest, most important input in the decision and the final say in the decision.
I don’t know how the Wilpons run things for certain but enough second and third hand reporting suggests that their hands are involved more than they should be that I’m skeptical this will change (assuming it is the current state of affairs).
My sincere hope is that the Wilpons realize how impractical and unsuccessful their being hands on has been and for the good of the organization decide this is the moment in history for them to take a step back, hire a wise, respected, savvy GM and let him do his job in the manner you describe (perhaps vetoing things beyond their budget but otherwise staying out of it).
saltygary
9/28/2010-2:09pm at 2:09 pm (UTC -4)
If you owned a 700M asset would you sit on the beach and drink cocktails and let everyone else do the work and provide no input?
Me? I would drink cocktails and stick my nose in everyone business.
stickguy
9/28/2010-2:14pm at 2:14 pm (UTC -4)
I’d sell it and buy the beach instead.
TRS86
9/28/2010-2:16pm at 2:16 pm (UTC -4)
Very true, I really think the owner who does not have his nose in it would be the exception instead of the other way around.
saltygary
9/28/2010-2:23pm at 2:23 pm (UTC -4)
It’s tough. It seems like history keeps repeating itself with this team but the way the media is we really don’t know how much is hype verses truth with the Wilpons. I guess we will see based on who they get in there.
GravediggerHebner
9/28/2010-2:24pm at 2:24 pm (UTC -4)
I think we’ve come to the “matter of degrees” portion of the conversation.
I think of course as the heavily invested owner I’d have my nose in things but how far in? How much leeway would I allow my employees to do their jobs?
IMO ideally I’d hire competent people to do their jobs and let them do them while establishing some line(s) that shouldn’t be crossed (i.e. “don’t hire OJ Simpson”) and then evaluate periodically how they’re doing their jobs. If not well then replace them.
But if I’m just going to do their jobs why hire them, it sure doesn’t seem economically sound to hire a GM and then do his job. I’d just rather save his salary if I’m doing his job.
saltygary
9/28/2010-2:29pm at 2:29 pm (UTC -4)
Agree completely, the real problem is we don’t know the truth about how the organization is run.
wannybackstra
9/28/2010-2:29pm at 2:29 pm (UTC -4)
You can’t handle the truth!
stickguy
9/28/2010-2:34pm at 2:34 pm (UTC -4)
remember that Mets FO flowchart that was floating around a while back? Supposed to be humor, but I am starting to wonder if it might just have been a lot closer to the truth!
stickguy
9/28/2010-2:33pm at 2:33 pm (UTC -4)
to your last question, big bosses hire guys to be front men all the time. That way they have someone to do the dirty work, and of course take the fall if things go bad! And Jeffy has to be at least smart enough to know the reis if he just said screw it and appointed himself the titular Gm, and started doing the job for real.
also, keep in mind this is the Mets. And being met fans/bloggers, this is the team we obsess about. And being in NY, there is plenty of media to pile on and fan the flames.
For the most part, we have little idea how other teams operate, in terms of owner involvement above the “real” BB people level. So, entirely possible Jeffy/Fred are pretty much the norm, but no one cares about it with the majority of other teams.
It does seem though that the teams reported to have more hands off owners seem to be the best run (although has that always been true of the Twins, the hands off part?)
So maybe, an owner that likes to play with his toy is irrelevant, if there are really strong, knowledgeable people in the BB ops (FO) area to keep him in line?
Kind of like giving him a fancy telephone, and not plugging it in. Or not Turning on Linda Eastman’s Mic.
GravediggerHebner
9/28/2010-2:47pm at 2:47 pm (UTC -4)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Major_League_Baseball_principal_owners
This might lend to any discussion about MLB owners and their input or lack thereof. Maybe not.
kingman 26
9/28/2010-3:00pm at 3:00 pm (UTC -4)
“Or not Turning on Linda Eastman’s Mic.”
HAHA, that’s a great blast from the past!