PDA

View Full Version : Brunt Interview with Paul Beeston



StealingSigns
03-23-2012, 05:10 PM
I was going to lump this into the Spring Training thread, but I think this is threadworthy all on its own.

Beest talks about the Darvish debacle, not signing Fielder, and the front offices policy on being so tight lipped, and how they can improve.


Sportsnet's Stephen Brunt recently sat down in Dunedin with Toronto Blue Jays president Paul Beeston to talk legacies, fan support and building a winner.

Brunt: Are there any similarities between now and the building of the Blue Jays' first contending team in the 1980s?

Beeston: You need good people. We put in Alex Anthopoulos. Alex hired the right people, much like Pat [Gillick] did. His philosophy is a little different, but otherwise he's much like Pat. He's entirely focused on what we want to do, which is win. It's not just a matter of putting a competitive team on the field. It's putting a system in place that is going to allow us to win on a regular and annual basis.

I think he's done an unbelievable job. All of a sudden it's happened. We went from the 29th best to the third best organization in baseball. It's through all of those draft picks he stockpiled.

He's been lucky too, because he's got a good owner in Rogers. As much as they were maligned for not giving money for Yu Darvish or not giving money for Prince Fielder, the fact of the matter is: where we've needed a lot of money in the farm system and scouting, they've never held back. We've spent more money in the farm system and in development than any team in baseball over the last three years.

So actually it feels better than the first time, because I feel like we've got a group of young guys, athletic guys, determined guys who get along well, but we've also got a farm system that's going to push those guys. The farm system is deep. It starts right at the bottom and it goes right up to triple-A.

We invested a lot of money in Latin America. Those players won't project until 2015. But we still have that nucleus that we have now, if Colby Rasmus and Kelly Johnson can do what they've done in the past and play up to their athletic ability. Alex has put together a hell of a team. He's turned this team around in two years. It's a completely different team.

Brunt: About that off-season criticism, and the heightened fan expectations…

Beeston: We have to be a little bit more transparent than we were. Alex and I probably have a minor difference of opinion on what we should do. Alex doesn't tell anybody anything. He believes that's a competitive disadvantage, playing things out through the press, and I tend to agree with him. That said, with the Darvish situation-and that was the real killer-they said [Alex] went over to Japan to look at him and then all of a sudden we were supposed to sign Darvish.

It doesn't make any sense that just because he saw him, we were going to sign him. We let that thing build over a period of five days and then we got hammered. We should have said we're not in, or we are in. We just kind of went rope-a-dope. I think we could have handled that a little differently, and I think we will in the future. And then the Prince Fielder thing happened.

Brunt: But at least they care.

Beeston: We could see it last year, we could see it in our ratings, we could kind of see it in our turnstile. The bad thing about it was that we got a lot of bad press. The good thing about it was that the negative feelings were there. It wasn't that we were irrelevant.

It wasn't that we didn't resonate. People were actually following the Blue Jays and caring. There was a positive side effect to all of this negativity. They're following us. They want us to be there. They know how close we're getting.

Maybe we should go a little quicker, but we just simply couldn't do it and stay with the plan, which is to build something for the long term, not the short term. The onus is on us to deliver.

Brunt: Which brings us to Alex's comment about "payroll parameters" from ownership, which seemed to suggest that the team wouldn't be able to spend until the seats at the Rogers Centre filled up.

Beeston I think Rogers will give us the resources to do it. The fans can count on Rogers spending the money, because we've had the discussion with ownership. But at the same time, we're running a business here. It's not saying the fans have got to come out and then we'll spend money. That was misinterpreted.

The fact is, we've got to win to make the fans come out, and then we spend the money. But we have to give them the reason to come out. That got lost in Alex's comment that day. It was that we win, you come out, we'll spend the money-it won't be money we put in our pocket; it will be money reinvested in the team.

That's the difference between us and the Tampa Bay Rays. They're looking to bring their salaries down. We're looking to take our salaries up, because we know we have the resources to do it from an ownership point of view and a fan point of view. I have absolute total conviction that that's going to happen.

Brunt: So look into your crystal ball…

Beeston: I was always accused of being one of those guys who saw the glass half full, wearing rose-coloured glasses. And I'm still that way. But now maybe I ought to temper it, because you know now there are a lot of people who are going to start thinking they're the '27 Yankees. We ain't the '27 Yankees… yet. But you know what? If we don't have injuries and the pitching comes along the way we think it will come, we're going to play well; I think we can have a hell of a year this year.

Can we be playing after the end of the regular season? I'd like to think so. I don't think it's daydreaming. I don't think it would be a miracle. I think we've got a very good team with a lot of good players. And that's what the aim is-to be playing in October.

We've still got a high hill to climb and we're in a tough division. But I'd rather be in that division than any other division in baseball. With the Yankees and Red Sox and Rays, every game means something. It's going to be fantastic. Then you've got Texas and California and Detroit. You're going to play your six games against them.

There aren't any easy spots. But we don't think we're an easy mark for other teams either.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/magazine/2012/03/23/brunt_beeston_magazine_q_and_a/

BATSKY87
03-23-2012, 05:33 PM
"The fact is, we've got to win to make the fans come out, and then we spend the money."

Sounds pretty much the same as the fans need to come out before we spend money...dont know exactly what got lost in translation.

Pfeifer
03-23-2012, 05:37 PM
Good read, thanks.

wagnall
03-23-2012, 06:01 PM
Good read, I really like where this team is headed. Not a 1 year wonder but a legit contender every year, making adjustments as they go. No wholesale moves. Seems no matter who you talk to, there are nothing but good things being said about the players and the future success of this team. Very excited to see, where we are at the end of 2012 and if there are some deals to be made to better the team in 2013, that Rogers does pony up the money needed to get those 2 or 3 pieces we will need.

JaysFan87
03-23-2012, 06:25 PM
"The fact is, we've got to win to make the fans come out, and then we spend the money."

Sounds pretty much the same as the fans need to come out before we spend money...dont know exactly what got lost in translation.

No its not. The perceived notion by many fans in the offseason was that the team would only spend money on high priced FA if fans come out, putting the onus on the fans. What they were trying to say and what they wanted to say (according to Beaston) was that the onus is on the team to produce a winning team in order for the fans to come out. While you could argue that FA's are the way to go, that is your opinion. Their view has it building through the farm to sustain new players coming into the team year in and out. Two schools of thought I guess. But he does clarify the position of the team that was badly needed.

bartron_44
03-23-2012, 06:39 PM
Can we blame them for speaking the truth? They will increase spending when ticket sales allows them to...because this is a business.

To put it in perspective, the Yankees sold over 2 Million more tickets then the Blue Jays did last year. 2 effing million!! They actually have averaged considerably more then double our attendance at every game over the past 2 seasons.

(NOTE: I only checked the last 2 so it is probably many more years then that)

How much is the average price of a Yankee ticket? According to Forbes.com their average price was $63. and "The baseball team generated $325 million in revenue from regular-season tickets and luxury suites in 2010.":

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2011/33/baseball-valuations-11_New-York-Yankees_334613.html


Is it such a stretch for a team to say attendance is correlated to team salary? Look at the top attendance teams in baseball over the past 2 years:

Yankees
Phillies
Cards
Dodgers
Angels
Cubs
Red Sox

Who are the teams that everyone hears are going after just about every big free agent when they become available? You guessed it....these same teams.

The Jays drew more than 4 million fans each year from 1991 through 1993 when they were the best team in baseball and had one of the highest payrolls. If they ever get back to winning, it should be sustainable to increase payroll to be among the highest in baseball again, because if they start selling out again, they can draw more fans then anyone in baseball.

lexecutioner
03-23-2012, 11:32 PM
good read.. its easy to lose patience especially here in Canada where we are so deprived of a quality sport franchise but i do like the direction the Jays are going through right now. Better than Raps and the Leafs.

mtf
03-24-2012, 10:42 AM
"The fact is, we've got to win to make the fans come out, and then we spend the money."

Sounds pretty much the same as the fans need to come out before we spend money...dont know exactly what got lost in translation.

I love this idea that Rogers is some poor company that cant afford to invest in their own product, and are putting the onus on the consumer to invest in it for them, and only then they may decide they want to invest your money into their future product.

Does this work in other business ventures? Does Coca-cola get you to pay for an empty can, and tell you that they're going to take your money and may use it to buy the ingredients to fill that cup with soda?

KingCanada
03-24-2012, 01:31 PM
i love this idea that rogers is some poor company that cant afford to invest in their own product, and are putting the onus on the consumer to invest in it for them, and only then they may decide they want to invest your money into their future product.

Does this work in other business ventures? Does coca-cola get you to pay for an empty can, and tell you that they're going to take your money and may use it to buy the ingredients to fill that cup with soda?

+1

wamco
03-24-2012, 01:32 PM
sounds like the bid on darvish wasn't what was led to believe

the_jon
03-24-2012, 01:37 PM
I don't have anything against Paul Beeston but I can never seem to follow his train of thought whenever he talks to the media. He answers everything so vaguely and contradicts himself a little sometimes.

But spend the money and I'll go the games even if you suck. Show us how serious front office really is about making a winner don't just tell us what you think we want to hear.

the_jon
03-24-2012, 01:39 PM
sounds like the bid on darvish wasn't what was led to believe
After all the Japanese pitchers I've seen with hype like his essentially fail at the major league level, I just don't even want to take that kind of a risk. You might aswell give 100 million to Bryce Harper right now.

JaysFan87
03-24-2012, 05:46 PM
I love this idea that Rogers is some poor company that cant afford to invest in their own product, and are putting the onus on the consumer to invest in it for them, and only then they may decide they want to invest your money into their future product.

Does this work in other business ventures? Does Coca-cola get you to pay for an empty can, and tell you that they're going to take your money and may use it to buy the ingredients to fill that cup with soda?

I think he made it pretty clear in that interview that he and Anthopoulos are putting the onus on themselves to create a team that people will go out and watch.

mtf
03-24-2012, 06:40 PM
I think he made it pretty clear in that interview that he and Anthopoulos are putting the onus on themselves to create a team that people will go out and watch.

Yes, they did say that. It's irrelevant to the point I was making though. All that part is about (the part you're referring to) is public relations after they essentially blamed the fan base for their low attendance and their fourth place finishes.

What I was saying is that Rogers (a multi-billion dollar corporation) is coming to you, hat in hand, and asking for you to invest in their product because they are unwilling to. It's absurd.

JaysFan87
03-24-2012, 07:23 PM
Yes, they did say that. It's irrelevant to the point I was making though. All that part is about (the part you're referring to) is public relations after they essentially blamed the fan base for their low attendance and their fourth place finishes.

What I was saying is that Rogers (a multi-billion dollar corporation) is coming to you, hat in hand, and asking for you to invest in their product because they are unwilling to. It's absurd.

Thats what i don't get and ppl need to realize. In the sports arena, gone are the days of the single person owners who are run the team on passion. Whether you or I like it the team sports owners these days are usually multiply owners or corporations who's single objective is to create a profitable business. And while winning brings in more fans and thus more money, owners will not risk long term money and profits without a very good chance. What Rogers is saying is that the onus is on the team management to produce a quality team that fans will support year and year out, then with that money produce they will reinvest.

Rogers corporation did not build itself as one of the most profitable company in the country by accident. They take smart risks in business. Sports is now a business. I've said in the other threads that when you hear the New YOrk Yankees worried about tax thresholds then you know the sports business landscape has changed. Money will be there, when the team is competitive but the onus here is on Anthopoulos and Beaston to build a team that can compete and draw fans. When that happens and fans show up (and don't say they wont becasue no matter how much fans hate owners, if there is a winning team on the field/ice/court, they will come out) that money will be put back into the club to keep their players and build upon them (according to beaston and just the recent history of AA, resign his own players to long term, team friendly contracts).


And while people might not like the route they are taking to become a quality team year in year out, there is no right way to do it and this is the way they choose to do it.


People like to rag on ROgers and they have every right to be happy/upset/disappointed/enthusiastic. But I don't remember any other Person/Company lining up to buy the team 12 years ago nor have any other person/company stepped to buy this team because they feel they are headed down a bad direction. People/fans sometimes need to step back from their affiliations and look what is happening in reality.

mtf
03-24-2012, 08:47 PM
Well that was a long-winded way of saying "It's a business and their goal is to make money, winning is a distant second on the priorities list." Either way, we both know where we each stand on this issue; I think they need to invest in their own product to make it a winning and sell-able commodity, and you think they will win without investing therefore they absolutely shouldn't because it would hurt Rogers profit margin.

JaysFan87
03-24-2012, 09:05 PM
Well that was a great way of missing the point. I never said that winning is a distant second. What I said is that they are going at it a different way. Winning isnt all about how much money you put into your payroll (the cubs are a great example of that). Its about how you build the team. AA is looking to build a team like the Rangers and Phillies where he waits for his strong farm system to produce quality players and then add through trade or FA. There is nothing wrong with that approach as the Rangers and Phillies have showed that over the past 5-7 years. Again it should be noted that the core of the rangers and phillies have all been home grown for the most part and spending on FA came after that core showed that they can be competitive.

mtf
03-24-2012, 09:10 PM
Well that was a great way of missing the point. I never said that winning is a distant second. What I said is that they are going at it a different way. Winning isnt all about how much money you put into your payroll (the cubs are a great example of that). Its about how you build the team. AA is looking to build a team like the Rangers and Phillies where he waits for his strong farm system to produce quality players and then add through trade or FA. There is nothing wrong with that approach as the Rangers and Phillies have showed that over the past 5-7 years. Again it should be noted that the core of the rangers and phillies have all been home grown for the most part and spending on FA came after that core showed that they can be competitive.

There's no debate about the quality of the core of the team. In fact, much of the frustration among fans of the Blue Jays this off-season is because the fact that the core of the team they've developed is ready and they need to shed the dead weight on the roster and bring in a few top tier pieces to shape the team into a true contender.

Instead, they did nothing of significance in the off-season. All they did was bring in relief pitchers. Bullpens get blown up and put back together every season, it's hardly building the core or a supplemental move for long-term contention.

JaysFan87
03-24-2012, 09:18 PM
There's no debate about the quality of the core of the team. In fact, much of the frustration among fans of the Blue Jays this off-season is because the fact that the core of the team they've developed is ready and they need to shed the dead weight on the roster and bring in a few top tier pieces to shape the team into a true contender.

Instead, they did nothing of significance in the off-season. All they did was bring in relief pitchers. Bullpens get blown up and put back together every season, it's hardly building the core or a supplemental move for long-term contention.

Maybe this is were fans differ I guess. While I love teh direction of this team right now and love the young players at key positions. There are far too many question marks on this team going into this season to say that you have your core. While Bautsita, Escobar, Romero are great building blocks you do not know what you are going to get out of Lawrie, Rasmus, LF (Snider,Thames), Lind, Arencibia. Not to mention Morrow, Cecil, Alvarez, and McGowan. As much as I hope and that Lawrie becomes a star he is on 150 AB into his career and that rotation si talented but have not shown any consistency yet which is fine now becomes there are still very young but you need more before you can say you have a solid core.

There is nothing to say that if these players perform to their skill level then they will be in great shape, even this year come deadline to add players. But there are still many question marks that need to be answered before the blue jays and fans like me and you can say they have a stable core of players. IMO

mtf
03-24-2012, 09:33 PM
Maybe this is were fans differ I guess. While I love teh direction of this team right now and love the young players at key positions. There are far too many question marks on this team going into this season to say that you have your core. While Bautsita, Escobar, Romero are great building blocks you do not know what you are going to get out of Lawrie, Rasmus, LF (Snider,Thames), Lind, Arencibia. Not to mention Morrow, Cecil, Alvarez, and McGowan. As much as I hope and that Lawrie becomes a star he is on 150 AB into his career and that rotation si talented but have not shown any consistency yet which is fine now becomes there are still very young but you need more before you can say you have a solid core.

There is nothing to say that if these players perform to their skill level then they will be in great shape, even this year come deadline to add players. But there are still many question marks that need to be answered before the blue jays and fans like me and you can say they have a stable core of players. IMO

You can say that there are far too many question marks, and count Lawrie, Arencibia, Morrow, Alvarez among them to help make that argument, but technically every player is a question mark if you want to put it like that. All you have are expectations and these players are expected to perform well. The same cannot be said (at least for most people) of Lind and Cecil for example. If you replaced those 2 alone with Fielder and Darvish (just for arguments sake), wouldn't you expect this team as a legitimate contender for the division this year instead of merely hoping? I want this team to bring in some proven players and turn area's of concern into strengths because I don't want to be sold on blind hope alone (yet again).

JaysFan87
03-24-2012, 09:46 PM
It would be ridiculous count on Lawrie, Arencibia, Morrow, Alvarez, Rasmus as everyday players in 2012. You say you don't want to be sold on blind hope but that is exactly what you would be doing if they Jays stood up before this season and said they have the playoff team that will compete for the WS this year. Especially if they promoted that with Lawrie, Alvarez, Thames/Snider, Rasmus as the core. Like I said they have great skill but you need some track record of consistent performance before you can reasonable count on them as your core. I have no problem with adding to the core and would be upset if the young players on this team perform well this year and no additions are made to this team to improve on areas of weakness. But i dont think that time was last year.


But like you said it looks like we both know were we stand and I appreciate the honest discussion about this topic. It seems like people can not have rational conversations around here without *****ing and pointless insults. SO for that I applaud you!:clap:

mtf
03-24-2012, 09:55 PM
It would be ridiculous count on Lawrie, Arencibia, Morrow, Alvarez, Rasmus as everyday players in 2012. You say you don't want to be sold on blind hope but that is exactly what you would be doing if they Jays stood up before this season and said they have the playoff team that will compete for the WS this year. Especially if they promoted that with Lawrie, Alvarez, Thames/Snider, Rasmus as the core. Like I said they have great skill but you need some track record of consistent performance before you can reasonable count on them as your core. I have no problem with adding to the core and would be upset if the young players on this team perform well this year and no additions are made to this team to improve on areas of weakness. But i dont think that time was last year.

Another thing to consider is that the organization can ALWAYS tell you there are question marks on their roster and that's why they're going to play the "wait and see" card to forego the pressure to spend. It has the advantage of appearing analytical, responsible and patient in addition to the benefits of costing the team less money.

But the truth is that there are no perfect teams out there. Every team has flaws. It's the team that tries to adjust and eliminate flaws, and not rest on it's laurels, that is worthy of being respected and encourages me to become a consumer.


But like you said it looks like we both know were we stand and I appreciate the honest discussion about this topic. It seems like people can not have rational conversations around here without *****ing and pointless insults. SO for that I applaud you!:clap:

I concur. It's perfectly reasonable to disagree and debate without turning into a child about it. I thank you for the compliment and metaphorically high five you right back.

wagnall
03-24-2012, 11:02 PM
Nice discussion, good points made by both . Nice to see a back and forth that doesn't end up calling each other names or getting in to a useless pissing contest. Well done guys. :rock:

wamco
03-25-2012, 12:38 AM
People like to rag on ROgers and they have every right to be happy/upset/disappointed/enthusiastic. But I don't remember any other Person/Company lining up to buy the team 12 years ago nor have any other person/company stepped to buy this team because they feel they are headed down a bad direction. People/fans sometimes need to step back from their affiliations and look what is happening in reality.[/QUOTE]

teams gain value though, it's not a surprise. The jays have almost tripled I think in value since the purchase. According to Forbes, the average of the values gained last year alone was 10 percent. I'm very scared at the takeaway of the 30M in the new CBA. For the same reasons Rogers hasn't simply thrown in an extra 30 M a year on payroll up to now, I find it hard to believe they will simply start that process soon. It's a real kick to the balls to them. Big Bucks.

es0terik
03-25-2012, 01:53 AM
Who CARES. They already said they want to build like the Rangers and Rays, which is to win with what you have and then put money into it. Neither team had even a top 20 payroll until they showed they were good. That's what they want to build, who gives a **** about anything else? Who cares what they said and what word Beeston used when he was describing how he wipes his ***. People need to stop getting so serious about every little thing. Day in and day out there are WALLS of text on how upset we are with Rogers and what AA said and what Beeston said and about attendance and money. It doesn't matter!

es0terik
03-25-2012, 01:57 AM
And this is off topic but wamco would you PLEASE learn how to quote...

mtf
03-25-2012, 11:12 AM
Who CARES. They already said they want to build like the Rangers and Rays, which is to win with what you have and then put money into it. Neither team had even a top 20 payroll until they showed they were good. That's what they want to build, who gives a **** about anything else?

The Rays and the Rangers are 2 completely different situations than the Blue Jays.

First of all, the Rays never reinvest in their own franchise after success, and some would argue that their window of success will be cut short because of it. People like Mike Wilner (who I have very little respect for) would seem to argue that case on a semi-regular basis.

Secondly, the Rangers early success came at a time when they were playing in a very week division. Saying that you have to win "x" number of games before you can and should spend is really excluding too many factors, such as the actual development of the team you have and the needs of that core group to turn it into a true contender.

Third, if you take a look over at the NL East, another extremely competitive division with a big spender in it, you'll see that 2 teams with a young core group of talented players decided to supplement their roster with proven big league talent to attempt to leap-frog those top teams rather than wait for their competitors to flame out. Neither Florida/Miami or Washington had years that matched the Blue Jays in number of wins.

Simply accepting the public relations oriented quotes from Anthopoulos or Beeston and becoming a docile and dispassionate fan may be acceptable and enjoyable for you, but I personally blame this fan base for not putting pressure on the organizations in this city to be better.

Sports fan bases like the ones in Montreal for the Canadiens or New York for the Yankees are not as passive as the ones in Toronto. They are involved and care. Personally, I'd love to see the so-called "fans" in Toronto share that passion for sports.


Who cares what they said and what word Beeston used when he was describing how he wipes his ***. People need to stop getting so serious about every little thing. Day in and day out there are WALLS of text on how upset we are with Rogers and what AA said and what Beeston said and about attendance and money. It doesn't matter!

If you don't like those walls of text, why complain about them rather than ignoring them altogether. I'm not telling you what to do by any means, I'm just wondering why post walls of text complaining about walls of text. It seems somewhat hypocritical and counter-productive.

MVP1
03-25-2012, 12:28 PM
Anything Rogers touches turns to ****. I try to avoid anything that is owned by Bell or Rogers, but it seems every channel is owned by them. All they care about is profit.

2009mvp
03-25-2012, 01:53 PM
I don't get why the Rangers being in the West as opposed to the East is at all relevant. The fact is that they've built one of the three or four strongest ballclubs in baseball. That's the same goal the Jays should be striving for, who they've been competing with for the division title is completely meaningless. Which isn't to say that the Jays have to follow that blueprint, just that it is a sound one.

mtf
03-25-2012, 02:13 PM
I don't get why the Rangers being in the West as opposed to the East is at all relevant. The fact is that they've built one of the three or four strongest ballclubs in baseball. That's the same goal the Jays should be striving for, who they've been competing with for the division title is completely meaningless. Which isn't to say that the Jays have to follow that blueprint, just that it is a sound one.

The point about the Rangers being in the AL West instead of the AL East, as I previously explained, was that their regular season wins or division titles cannot unilaterally be used as a barometer of success by which to measure the Toronto Blue Jays readiness to supplement the core of homegrown players with top tier external talent because the Texas Rangers core of homegrown talent can achieve more success due to the lack of competition within their own division.

I would argue that the current Toronto Blue Jays, if put within the AL West in 2010, would be able to achieve at least the same level of regular season success that the Texas Rangers, and their young core of homegrown talent (plus Cliff Lee), were able to.

The point is that you cant just point to any one team and say "look at what they did, and duplicate it without deviating ever so slightly from their plan". Each team has a different set of circumstances and must act accordingly.

JaysFan87
03-25-2012, 03:39 PM
I don't think the plan is to say win X amount of games and then we will spend. I think that the plan is develop good core with at least some track record and the augment that with trades and FA. Like I said beofre the core group iof players are very skilled but you do not know what you are getting from the majority of these players save for Bautista, Escobar, Romero and to some extent Johnson. EVery other position including 2-5 in the rotation have not shown any consistency whether it be age (Lawrie, Snider,Thames, Arencibia, Alvarez) or lack of performance consistency (Morrow, Cecil, McGowan, Lind). There is no exact number that needs to be win, but when the core is developed then you can say, "okay we need this and this in order to augment that." Right now too many questions need to be answered before one can say they need upgrades somewhere.


And like you said the 2010 team could have done something in the West but they are not, they are in the East like you have said many times. So you need an even better core of players to win.

You can absolutely look at the Rangers and say they developed a core and then added to it. Now they are one of the best teams in the league. AA and his staff are great talent evaluators and evaluating doesnt mean how many wins you have. You have to look at the competition you are playing against. Right now if you look at the rosters apart from Bautista and Escobar there is no other position on the field that you can say the jays are the best in the east. That could all change this year but right now and in the offseason you can not say that. I would be more upset if AA stood up this offseason and said he right now has the core of his team that will lead them to a championship because they dont...right now.

es0terik
03-25-2012, 04:57 PM
The Rays and the Rangers are 2 completely different situations than the Blue Jays.

First of all, the Rays never reinvest in their own franchise after success, and some would argue that their window of success will be cut short because of it.


If you don't like those walls of text, why complain about them rather than ignoring them altogether. I'm not telling you what to do by any means, I'm just wondering why post walls of text complaining about walls of text. It seems somewhat hypocritical and counter-productive.

I'm going to be honest, that is all I read from your post. For the first part: Again, it doesn't matter in the SLIGHTEST how the Rays reinvest in their own franchise, that has nothing to do with anything. The Rays built a contender almost completely through their own development, as did the Rangers. The only difference was the Rangers were able to afford to maintain that contender while the Rays likely will not. But again, none of that actually makes a difference, it's the building part that AA is concerned with.

As for the second paragraph, do you even know what a wall of text is? I didn't post a wall of text. It was maybe a paragraph. This entire discussion is about 'he said, she said', it doesn't matter. You sitting here and dedicating hours to discuss and debate is not going to make AA and Beeston change their plan. They've clearly stated their plan and it's incredibly apparent that it isn't Rogers choice to sit back and not fund the team, it's AA and Beeston's plan to do it like that. They've said over and over that Rogers has coughed up the money when it's been needed.

It wasn't "somewhat hypocritical and counter-productive" to post a paragraph as opposed to a wall of text. It would be hypocritical and counter-productive, however, to continue on a topic I have no interest in because, like I said, AA has already clearly outlined his plan. We don't need to sit here and ponder what the deeper meaning is in AA and Beeston's complex and cryptic agendas. This is the last I'm posting on this, if you want to continue, go right ahead.

mtf
03-25-2012, 07:10 PM
I'm going to be honest, that is all I read from your post. For the first part: Again, it doesn't matter in the SLIGHTEST how the Rays reinvest in their own franchise, that has nothing to do with anything. The Rays built a contender almost completely through their own development, as did the Rangers. The only difference was the Rangers were able to afford to maintain that contender while the Rays likely will not. But again, none of that actually makes a difference, it's the building part that AA is concerned with.

Well, I supposed you missed the point I made in my previous posts (the ones you would like to lead me to believe that you decided to only read certain paragraphs of, that you seemingly picked out at random). If you want to ignore rebuttals and merely regurgitate the same posts that lead me to reply in the first place, that's your prerogative.


As for the second paragraph, do you even know what a wall of text is? I didn't post a wall of text. It was maybe a paragraph. This entire discussion is about 'he said, she said', it doesn't matter. You sitting here and dedicating hours to discuss and debate is not going to make AA and Beeston change their plan. They've clearly stated their plan and it's incredibly apparent that it isn't Rogers choice to sit back and not fund the team, it's AA and Beeston's plan to do it like that. They've said over and over that Rogers has coughed up the money when it's been needed.

Discussion boards like this are meant to discuss and debate. I would think with 6,500 posts in the past year you would have figured this out on your own. The intention is clearly not to force Anthopoulos and Beeston to change what they're doing, and for you to even accuse of me that is a really childish or simply naive attack that is really uncalled for.


It wasn't "somewhat hypocritical and counter-productive" to post a paragraph as opposed to a wall of text. It would be hypocritical and counter-productive, however, to continue on a topic I have no interest in because, like I said, AA has already clearly outlined his plan. We don't need to sit here and ponder what the deeper meaning is in AA and Beeston's complex and cryptic agendas. This is the last I'm posting on this, if you want to continue, go right ahead.

Well, first of all, I thank you for the gesture of giving me permission to continue posting despite your supposed departure from this thread, but it was not requested nor required. If you had no interest in this topic, and that's what's leading you to no longer post here (time will tell if you are sincere) then there was no reason for you to reply to my earlier posts in this thread either, considering the topic has not changed since then. Also, your suggestion that this discussion is somehow "ponder what the deeper meaning is in AA and Beeston's complex and cryptic agendas" is another blatant mischaracterization, which is unfortunate. I would suggest that you try to conduct yourself with a little more dignity, because if you need to try to misrepresent the position of those you disagree with, then your counter arguments are too weak to stand on their own merits.