PDA

View Full Version : Larry Lucchino out as CEO Sam Kennedy as the replacement



randyisgoinsolo
08-01-2015, 07:44 PM
Lucchino out as CEO Sam Kennedy to replace him. Any thoughts?

-Lavigne43-
08-01-2015, 07:49 PM
Can't blame him for every bad roster move anymore.

j-bay
08-01-2015, 08:09 PM
Can't blame him for every bad roster move anymore.

This is true, but can we still celebrate the fact that he is gone?!

Corey
08-01-2015, 08:25 PM
Its a start.

randyisgoinsolo
08-01-2015, 08:45 PM
Now if Cherington can resign or get fired this will be better and a bigger step.

Bo Sox Fan
08-01-2015, 09:15 PM
Was this move made by Jon Henry himself or Tom Werner or ...

What are the details

-Lavigne43-
08-01-2015, 11:10 PM
The story given to us is that Lucchino is stepping down after the end of the season because he will be 70 and wants less responsibility. This also allows It's possible that he was forced out and this is just a narrative to make it appear like it was his decision.

Kennedy is a business exec and has never had any role or power in baseball operations decisions. It's not really certain how much influence Lucchino had in the baseball decisions, but theoretically Cherington, or the GM that replaces him after the season, will have more power and control over decision making.

Also Kennedy is only replacing Lucchino as president, the CEO position is unfilled as of now.

Corey
08-02-2015, 12:00 AM
From MLBTR


Executive vice president and COO Sam Kennedy will be promoted to club president. However, unlike Lucchino, Kennedy is not expected to have a role in baseball operations. Kennedy, 42, has worked with Lucchino for 20 years. Per Luchhino, “he’s certainly my choice, as well as that of John and Tom, to be promoted to the position of president.” Kennedy has been slowly taking over Lucchino’s responsibilities throughout the season.

Hopefully we get a veteran GM / Front Office guy

bagwell368
08-02-2015, 05:47 AM
The story given to us is that Lucchino is stepping down after the end of the season because he will be 70 and wants less responsibility. This also allows It's possible that he was forced out and this is just a narrative to make it appear like it was his decision.

Kennedy is a business exec and has never had any role or power in baseball operations decisions. It's not really certain how much influence Lucchino had in the baseball decisions, but theoretically Cherington, or the GM that replaces him after the season, will have more power and control over decision making.

Also Kennedy is only replacing Lucchino as president, the CEO position is unfilled as of now.

LL's fingerprints are on a lot of moves over the years - some good and more bad. His need to control finally forced Theo to move on for instance. He is also held to be responsible for the smear campaign against Francona. He also overruled BC and hired Valentine as Manager. I'm quite sure he had a major hand if not the leading hand in not offering Lester a fair contract.

I believe it to be a good thing that he's moving on, but the vacuum must be filed by a solid baseball man such as a Ricciardi or Alderson type.

Let's hope Werner's influence doesn't increase as its been said to do earlier this year because of this.

Let's also dismiss the Head of Pro Scouting, and clean house on the scouts, and possibly cut Bill James influence in that area if it's too great.

papipapsmanny
08-02-2015, 12:34 PM
Here is my thing... a lot of people like to go with the narrative... during Theo's time too, that all bad moves were the product of LL and all good ones credited to Theo or BC.

That is ridiculous. Theo had his large share of **** ups, so has BC, and both have had there share of successes.

LL is no saint but again he came on board after 2002 and look what was been done with him. 3 WS and a much better looking Fenway Park.

Either way if he was causing some problems at the top then this is a good move.

I also don't fire BC, he has made some good and some bad moves. Remember he is still new to the whole GM thing and he already helped get a WS and got us E-rod, and he is aggressive in his promotions to the MLB level which I really like. Teams with FO turnover (mainly GMs) are not successful.

I give him time I say the WS buys him 2016 to fix things up. I have a feeling a lot went down at the deadline that we don't know about in terms of trades that will go down once the offseason hits.

elements1985
08-02-2015, 02:17 PM
LL's fingerprints are on a lot of moves over the years - some good and more bad. His need to control finally forced Theo to move on for instance. He is also held to be responsible for the smear campaign against Francona. He also overruled BC and hired Valentine as Manager. I'm quite sure he had a major hand if not the leading hand in not offering Lester a fair contract

I agree, but Lucchino is often considered the meddling businessman preoccupied with ticket sales. It's important for people to remember, IMO, he is mainly a baseball man -- and that the "win now" mentality isn't a business mindset by default. LL definitely prompted some terrible decisions over the years. But I think they were chiefly fueled by a skewed, highly impatient baseball philosophy...not just the desire to increase revenue. Maybe a comparison to Steinbrenner with NYY is apt.

Shank has insisted that Lucchino's influence has waned over the years. I like the shake-up, but there are definitely other problems at the top. And I suspect they begin with Henry. Why he gets off in all this is beyond my comprehension.

GrkGawdofWalkz
08-03-2015, 11:26 AM
Good riddance, this team needs to go in a vastly different direction on approach. The paying for results has not worked in Boston. Ala 2011-12 and 2014-15. We're seeing that for the second straight season. I'm hoping Pablo is sent packing in the offseason. Lovable Panda my *****!

Wojo
08-03-2015, 01:42 PM
LL is an arrogant prick. This is a good move for the Sox.

LL's slap in the face to Lester is a perfect example of how he operates.

I'm sure he has done good things in his time in charge but he has definitely done a lot of bad.

Businessmen taking charge of a sports teams personnel decisions because of their know it all attitudes never is a good thing.

bagwell368
08-03-2015, 05:34 PM
Here is my thing... a lot of people like to go with the narrative... during Theo's time too, that all bad moves were the product of LL and all good ones credited to Theo or BC.

That is ridiculous. Theo had his large share of **** ups, so has BC, and both have had there share of successes.

I never said LL's moves were all bad and Theo's all good. But LL's finger prints are clear to see in a number of areas far outside of Theo's time - like for instance the filthy disgusting character destruction of the best Sox Manager in my lifetime, and the Lester idiocy to name two among many. You want to tie Theo in to that?

LL's nefarious career began on the Orioles half a lifetime ago (mine), instead of sticking up for this cretin, why don't you check into his career?

papipapsmanny
08-03-2015, 06:56 PM
I never said LL's moves were all bad and Theo's all good. But LL's finger prints are clear to see in a number of areas far outside of Theo's time - like for instance the filthy disgusting character destruction of the best Sox Manager in my lifetime, and the Lester idiocy to name two among many. You want to tie Theo in to that?

LL's nefarious career began on the Orioles half a lifetime ago (mine), instead of sticking up for this cretin, why don't you check into his career?

Because his career with the Red Sox was a huge success

Bos_Sports4Life
08-03-2015, 10:24 PM
Here is my thing... a lot of people like to go with the narrative... during Theo's time too, that all bad moves were the product of LL and all good ones credited to Theo or BC.

Its hard not to come to that conclusion when the red sox WORST season from 02-2011 was 86-76. Since that time? they are going to finish in DEAD LAST for the 3rd time in 4 yrs. The 2 biggest bright spots on this current team? Mookie/XB? Both Theo draftees.

Meanwhile? The Cubs have arguably the best young team in all of baseball with Theo building the cubs without worrying about all the extra BS.


That is ridiculous. Theo had his large share of **** ups, so has BC, and both have had there share of successes.

Any GM that is with a team for a decade will have plenty of screw up's/missed drafts (esp in baseball) etc etc. But given the big picture? Theo overall had great success and without him? they were done by july in 3 out of 4 seasons. I don't really remembering that happen ONCE with Theo.


LL is no saint but again he came on board after 2002 and look what was been done with him. 3 WS and a much better looking Fenway Park.

I'll give him all the credit in the world for making fenway what it is today...And quite frankly? that's his specialty. Roster building? He shouldn't have EVER be in charge.


I also don't fire BC, he has made some good and some bad moves. Remember he is still new to the whole GM thing and he already helped get a WS and got us E-rod, and he is aggressive in his promotions to the MLB level which I really like. Teams with FO turnover (mainly GMs) are not successful.

It all depends...If BC WAS responsible for the Porcello extension/Pablo signing/Letting lester walk etc etc? He shouldn't have final say.

I DO like BC's player developing. His high picks haven't been GREAT (Esp the ball pick) but the IFA guys have looked promising between Devers, Espinoza, Guerra etc.

But theirs obviously a diff between pro scouting and player development. He needs to prove he can scout MLB talent.



In Conclusion? I think Larry has value. HOWEVER, He's just not a "baseball" guy imo. Henry flat out made a HUGE mistake when he picked Larry over Theo...Cant think of a bigger mistake in the Henry tenure.

Fast forward 3 yrs? Larry is gone from his position and Theo is the president of the best young team in baseball.

bagwell368
08-04-2015, 06:29 AM
Because his career with the Red Sox was a huge success

So, the ends justify the means?

I work with someone like that - narcissistic vendetta carrying back stabbing beach who stops at nothing (tapped into boss's email (and shared it for months with her clique) and was caught, changed bosses written orders TWICE, and was bagged both times). Helps to sleep with the big boss.. She has destroyed morale, and forced everyone to watch their backs every second of every day. That's the sort of executive LL was with the Sox. Yum Yum.

I have no problems with his work with the park and the community. He made some good choices on the team side, but, he's far too much of a double edged sword to celebrate. Glad he's gone, now if the prime owners will get a real baseball guy in to set a new professional and above board tone, that would be welcome by true Sox fans.

RedSoxtober
08-04-2015, 09:55 AM
Its hard not to come to that conclusion when the red sox WORST season from 02-2011 was 86-76. Since that time? they are going to finish in DEAD LAST for the 3rd time in 4 yrs. The 2 biggest bright spots on this current team? Mookie/XB? Both Theo draftees.

...

It all depends...If BC WAS responsible for the Porcello extension/Pablo signing/Letting lester walk etc etc? He shouldn't have final say.

I DO like BC's player developing. His high picks haven't been GREAT (Esp the ball pick) but the IFA guys have looked promising between Devers, Espinoza, Guerra etc.


These two things -- the "Theo draftees" and the recent IFA guys -- are MUCH more closely linked than you might be giving credit for. Since he came on board as a scout in 1999 Cherington has been involved with player development. That was his specific role when Bogaerts was signed as an IFA and Betts was drafted. It may very well be that his approach to running the club is really about buying time for young guys to get into position to perform with the higher priced mercenaries coming in to provide a few marquee names to provide them cover. It fits a bit with the quote that slipped from either BC or Theo about how fun it would have been to just let all the kids get onto the MLB roster and play. The fanbase may not have the stomach for it but they have the talent in the system to make that very enticing.

I wonder if the contemplative Cherington might be better suited to the President's role with a more quick-executing guy coming into fill the GM role. BC could be the one to challenge things from the vision/strategy perspective while the GM takes on the tactical/execution role. The contrast in styles seems to have produced good results in the past and the quicker-execution approach would be much more productive in critical windows like the trade deadline and winter meetings.

-Lavigne43-
08-04-2015, 05:33 PM
Dombrowski was relieved of his job to "pursue other opportunities". I was just thinking about him the other day as someone to come in as part of an overseeing job.

Bos_Sports4Life
08-04-2015, 10:34 PM
These two things -- the "Theo draftees" and the recent IFA guys -- are MUCH more closely linked than you might be giving credit for. Since he came on board as a scout in 1999 Cherington has been involved with player development. That was his specific role when Bogaerts was signed as an IFA and Betts was drafted. It may very well be that his approach to running the club is really about buying time for young guys to get into position to perform with the higher priced mercenaries coming in to provide a few marquee names to provide them cover.

I will agree Ben.C has value. He may in fact be very good in player development and that obviously has lots of value...But I also don't want him having the final say when it comes to mlb talent. Having a legit team president that has the ability to oversee baseball operations (Theo for Ex.) would be big.

As for the 2nd point? More of an excuse IMO. Theo had to build the cubs from bottom up and the only way he could properly rebuild was with a few losing seasons. He had to develop the farm, rid themselves of some bad contracts etc. When theo helped build the sox? His "transitional" years were 87-90 wins.

Basically what I'm getting at? If we were the fl Marlins? Yes..the transition seasons between the waves of prospects will look bad. With Ben's resources? no reason for last place finishes...even WITH trying to put an emphases on player development.




It fits a bit with the quote that slipped from either BC or Theo about how fun it would have been to just let all the kids get onto the MLB roster and play. The fanbase may not have the stomach for it but they have the talent in the system to make that very enticing.

But the point people are missing....You can have the best of BOTH worlds...

They didn't deal ANY prospects and they still spent a TON of money...

Hanley..-0.2 WAR
Pablo...-0.6 WAR
Porcello...-0.6 WAR

COMBINED: -1.4 WAR. They are spending 50 Million on NEGATIVE production.

This isn't even "hindsight 50/50".

Porcello's 3 years prior to the Red Sox? 558 IP, 100 ERA+, 1.34 WHIP, 6.1 K's/9....and when you hear the sox front office after the signing all I kept hearing was "his stuff"...What stuff? It's not like he was a flamethrower who harnessed it in '14..Hes a contact pitcher.

Pablo? Going by OPS+..

'11- 155
'12- 123
'13- 116
'14- 113

Going with everything we knew...This specifics player decline, the historical early decline of such heavy players, and the wear and tear typical of 3B...Its not a surprise we are seeing what we are seeing.



I wonder if the contemplative Cherington might be better suited to the President's role with a more quick-executing guy coming into fill the GM role. BC could be the one to challenge things from the vision/strategy perspective while the GM takes on the tactical/execution role. The contrast in styles seems to have produced good results in the past and the quicker-execution approach would be much more productive in critical windows like the trade deadline and winter meetings.

It's a solid approach obviously but with the roles being reversed. I'd want the guy in charge to be able to scout MLB talent and have the GM giving him quality info on the kids.

Issues I see with boston??

* Non baseball guys are having too much say with roster building- This is painfully obvious. What I'm afraid of? Boston hires a non powerful CEO (another yes man) with Henry now playing the Larry role. This would be a disaster.

* Too much focus on computers? Not saying Bill James (and others in the field) dont have value but he's not a scout and computers will NEVER be able to replace trained eyes. Not saying he doesn't have value but I have always wondered if they might use those things TOO much.

Rewind 3 seasons ago and boston had a highly respected GM/in my opinion top 3 GM in ALL of baseball at the age of 38 and Henry picked 66 yr old lachino who is known for his marketing.

Fast forward 3 yrs? Larry is done as CEO and Theo is largely responsible for the cubs turnaround.

Fact is? Theo was VERY right. The "Monster" flat out got too big. Marketing is fine....but good luck marketing with a crap product. The dog wags the tail, the tail doesn't wag the dog and that was Theo's biggest issue.

homie564
08-04-2015, 10:37 PM
DD would be a PERFECT fit for what we need. An experienced guy who will do a fine job handling baseball ops. Werner would be a huge mistake.

Unless there's an outside chance we can buy Beane away from Oakland lol

RedSoxtober
08-05-2015, 12:48 AM
As for the 2nd point? More of an excuse IMO. Theo had to build the cubs from bottom up and the only way he could properly rebuild was with a few losing seasons. He had to develop the farm, rid themselves of some bad contracts etc. When theo helped build the sox? His "transitional" years were 87-90 wins.
I was merely speculating about BC's philosophy, not trying to defend what he has done or the results.


Basically what I'm getting at? If we were the fl Marlins? Yes..the transition seasons between the waves of prospects will look bad. With Ben's resources? no reason for last place finishes...even WITH trying to put an emphases on player development.
Of course. Sandoval was a mistake based on the decline already evident in his career numbers and the history of extremely obese players (one study suggested that he was playing the equivalent of his age 32 season THIS year based on his height/weight ratio).

I personally think that you're wrong on Porcello. I never heard any argument about "stuff". The arguments were age and trajectory. In essence his story is the EXACT opposite of Panda; he's a young SP with a consistently upward trajectory. While the net sum of his prior 3yrs may have been an ERA+ 100, it's important that he produced that with seasons of 93, 96, and 114 and that he did it at ages 23-25. That does not excuse this season's miserable results (which I think came from him trying too hard to be a strikeout pitcher against his pitch-to-contact, groundball success) but it puts the extension in a context that I consider reasonable for the same reasons that I consider Sandoval unreasonable. (cf the ages 27-30 seasons of Doug Fister).

Hanley? Ugh, no clue. You don't have to be a good fielder to be acceptable in front of the Green Monster but he started as horrible and has not moved the needle much. It was a overpaid gamble (with no other suitors at the time it seems) that had a very bad down side if it did not work out.

The main problem that I had with BC on the above is that he said that he'd thought through each transaction in hindsight and could not see where any of them had gone wrong. Perhaps the future will prove him right but in the present I'd suggest that any ONE might not have been wrong but the cumulative effect of them was. Heck, even Pablo/Hanley combination on it's own was wrong; we had multiple suggestions of BOTH players transitioning to 1B/DH when Napoli/Ortiz departed. Without realizing it, even this forum was nailing the future problems we'd face. If BC could not see that then some part of the organization around him MUST be able to see it for the group to be successful.


It's a solid approach obviously but with the roles being reversed. I'd want the guy in charge to be able to scout MLB talent and have the GM giving him quality info on the kids.
I think that this assumes too much about the way organizations work. Two similar org charts do not necessarily function the same way. JH is a very trust-my-lieutenants, hands-off owner while Mark Cuban can't help but meddle in the daily affairs, for example. A PBO/GM relationship could work much the same was as JH.

The reason that I would put BC in the PBO seat is because of his contemplative nature. He's prone to sit in the corner and think about things for a while and come to reasoned decisions slowly. IMO that type of person is better suited to set the guiding values and strategies of the organization (which is increasingly the role the higher you go in an org). Likewise I think the GM needs to be more of a quick decision maker -- capable of being guided by the strategies but also evolving tactics for specific markets and evaluating things like trade proposals and contract offers almost at a gut level. I think the GM needs to be quicker on his feet in evolving situations than BC... but I think that BC would be great at looking at the conclusion of a quick decision maker with a hard proposal and second guessing it against the guiding principles.

As is probably evident by the above, my fear with BC remaining as GM even with a baseball guy as PBO above him, is that he does not react quickly enough. A great baseball guy at PBO is not necessarily going to get better results if he sees only 40% of the possibilities because so many things have been missed or filtered out by the GM.



Rewind 3 seasons ago and boston had a highly respected GM/in my opinion top 3 GM in ALL of baseball at the age of 38 and Henry picked 66 yr old lachino who is known for his marketing.
You seem to be saying that Lucchino got his role when Theo left but that is completely inaccurate. Lucchino has been President and CEO of the Red Sox since he, as part of the ownership group with JH, took over the Red Sox in 2002. He is NOT known as a marketing genius; that's Werner and Kennedy. Lucchino is a business guy but considered by many insiders as a baseball guy, too.

Bos_Sports4Life
08-05-2015, 02:41 AM
I was merely speculating about BC's philosophy, not trying to defend what he has done or the results.

Its a sound philosophy that every good GM tries to do, esp in todays game with escalating costs. Building a strong nucleus of farm guys surrounded by productive FA's has always been a good recipe. But knowing the recipe and being able to actually do it are 2 diff things.



Of course. Sandoval was a mistake based on the decline already evident in his career numbers and the history of extremely obese players (one study suggested that he was playing the equivalent of his age 32 season THIS year based on his height/weight ratio).

but isn't that scary? When a fan can see the disaster from miles away and they go ahead and do it anyways?


I personally think that you're wrong on Porcello. I never heard any argument about "stuff". The arguments were age and trajectory. In essence his story is the EXACT opposite of Panda; he's a young SP with a consistently upward trajectory. While the net sum of his prior 3yrs may have been an ERA+ 100, it's important that he produced that with seasons of 93, 96, and 114 and that he did it at ages 23-25. That does not excuse this season's miserable results (which I think came from him trying too hard to be a strikeout pitcher against his pitch-to-contact, groundball success) but it puts the extension in a context that I consider reasonable for the same reasons that I consider Sandoval unreasonable. (cf the ages 27-30 seasons of Doug Fister).

I just don't see 20+ MILL/Yr when looking at his numbers. His career body of work suggested a low 4 ERA type pitcher.

I mean last season should have been seen as an anomaly, not an upward trajectory.

Now I DONT blame boston for trading cespedes for him...but assuming he was anything more than his career suggested? mistake imo.

[QUOTE]Hanley? Ugh, no clue. You don't have to be a good fielder to be acceptable in front of the Green Monster but he started as horrible and has not moved the needle much. It was a overpaid gamble (with no other suitors at the time it seems) that had a very bad down side if it did not work out.

Out of the Pablo signing/porcello extension I had the least amount of problem on hanley. Due to a few reasons

* offensive Production when healthy
* Good numbers in career as DH (Some guys seem to struggle with the bat when they don't also play defense).

Now obviously it backfired but keeping Ortiz around is a net negative imo...Not that he is himself but the fact it keeps hanley in the field.



The reason that I would put BC in the PBO seat is because of his contemplative nature. He's prone to sit in the corner and think about things for a while and come to reasoned decisions slowly. IMO that type of person is better suited to set the guiding values and strategies of the organization (which is increasingly the role the higher you go in an org). Likewise I think the GM needs to be more of a quick decision maker -- capable of being guided by the strategies but also evolving tactics for specific markets and evaluating things like trade proposals and contract offers almost at a gut level. I think the GM needs to be quicker on his feet in evolving situations than BC... but I think that BC would be great at looking at the conclusion of a quick decision maker with a hard proposal and second guessing it against the guiding principles.

IF ben had a hand in last off seasons moves? I just don't have much faith in him other than a player developmental kind of guy.




You seem to be saying that Lucchino got his role when Theo left but that is completely inaccurate. Lucchino has been President and CEO of the Red Sox since he, as part of the ownership group with JH, took over the Red Sox in 2002.

I understand that part but not promoting Theo and taking over larry is the issue I have. What stopped henry doing it 3 yrs ago?





He is NOT known as a marketing genius; that's Werner and Kennedy. Lucchino is a business guy but considered by many insiders as a baseball guy, too.

just figured he was the marketing guy because of the annoying constant selling job and has made many statements trying to market the team and the fact he seemed to care deeply about the marketability of the players- but I suppose that ties into the bottom line of a business also.

I just see it hard seeing someone as a baseball guy without any type of background coming into the league all the while caring about stuff other than a players on the field value.

RedSoxtober
08-05-2015, 09:50 AM
but isn't that scary? When a fan can see the disaster from miles away and they go ahead and do it anyways?
What's even scarier to me is claiming that he can look back and not see what went wrong.


I mean last season should have been seen as an anomaly, not an upward trajectory.
ERA+, WHIP, FIP, K/BB, ... almost every peripheral improved EVERY YEAR from his age 21 thru age 25 seasons. Five consecutive years of improvement is an upward trajectory even if 2014 was a bigger leap than might have been expected. If, to you that doesn't correlate to his contract then that doesn't bother me. I think that it is a little rich but I understand it.


Out of the Pablo signing/porcello extension I had the least amount of problem on hanley. Due to a few reasons

* offensive Production when healthy
* Good numbers in career as DH (Some guys seem to struggle with the bat when they don't also play defense).

Now obviously it backfired but keeping Ortiz around is a net negative imo...Not that he is himself but the fact it keeps hanley in the field.
The Hanley deal was not necessarily bad. Hanley+Panda was. Hanley+Panda+Ortiz definitely was given that Ortiz is essentially in control of whether or not he comes back. If we were free from just one of these contracts this season would have turned out little different BUT we'd be facing much simpler offseason decisions and we'd have $40M in cap space to do it.


I understand that part but not promoting Theo and taking over larry is the issue I have. What stopped henry doing it 3 yrs ago?
What scenario do you have in mind? Relieving Lucchino of his Pres title and handing it to Theo while begging him to stay? That's something of a recipe for disaster. It also would have done little to change the dynamics with CEO Lucchino still having the final say and creating tremendous friction with Theo.

The what stopped him part is much simpler. Two things. First, JH considers Lucchino to be the best hire he made relative to the Sox. He HAS done great things for the club although I think his power went too far. Second, Lucchino was/is one of the owners. You can't really reduce his role without forcing him out and there's no reason to be that drastic just to keep Theo.

Why can they do it now? Fairly simple again. He gets to be a scapegoat of sorts for two consecutive years of failure. He's at least somewhat disliked outside the FO so people will pin all the bad deals on him as he leaves (and they could be right). He's also got the leadership role with the PawSox that is diverting his attention so they can blame it on him being focused away from Fenway (which he was after the death of his co-owner in PAW).