After 5 Years Is Ross Atkins the 2nd Best GM in Blue Jays History?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChongInc.

Well I only minimized the credit for signing springer. My only critisizim for signing Ryu has been his age. Doesn’t align, but at least it’s a short term commitment.

Also never suggested taking the AA approach with this rebuild - unless you’re referring to trading some meh prospects in the top 100 to bolster our playoff run in 2016. Definitely I think that should have been done and I don’t understand the argument against it. Perhaps you can elaborate on that because I don’t understand why (in hindsight) you would be against that. Unless you loved the prospects for some reason.

I can give more examples of complete tear downs leading to great teams with extended windows if you think only Epstein has the ability to do it:
Houston
TB
Cubs
Royals

The rangers, cards, and Indians did it fairly recently too, though the rangers and Indians couldn’t sustain it or win a championship.

“ Following a disappointing 2010 season, the Cleveland Indians missed the playoffs three years in a row. General Manager Mark Shapiro moved up to Vice President, and Chris Antonetti came in as the new GM.

The Indians went in a new direction, trading Shin-Shoo Choo for Trevor Bauer and Bryan Shaw; calling up prospects such as Carlos Santana, Michael Brantley, and Carlos Carrasco; and making smart draft picks such as Francisco Lindor, Tyler Naquin, Clint Frazier, Bradley Zimmer, and Justus Sheffield. Cleveland put together one of the best teams in baseball in 2016. They seem set to be a powerhouse for years to come.”

---

Cool. But it wasn't 50%. And when we originally talking about the Cubs we were talking about in a situation with a lot of over priced veteran players. Houston, KC and TB are not examples of that. KC and TB are small market teams that retool by trading players in their prime for a haul and Houston was terrible for a umber of years.

I don't really get the point of a team who ended up in a wild card spot trading meh prospects for what would essentially be meh players. I'd rather hold onto those wildcards and hope they find something. I forget what our holes were in '17 but am guessing it was SP. I don't think Alford gets you anything of value. I don't even know what the FA market was at the time and any comparable trades.

And he's the president here not the GM. Literally the same position he held when the Indians took a change in direction. And again, nothing like the Cubs situation with Theo

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenny Powders

Cool. But it wasn't 50%. And when we originally talking about the Cubs we were talking about in a situation with a lot of over priced veteran players. Houston, KC and TB are not examples of that. KC and TB are small market teams that retool by trading players in their prime for a haul and Houston was terrible for a umber of years.

I don't really get the point of a team who ended up in a wild card spot trading meh prospects for what would essentially be meh players. I'd rather hold onto those wildcards and hope they find something. I forget what our holes were in '17 but am guessing it was SP. I don't think Alford gets you anything of value. I don't even know what the FA market was at the time and any comparable trades.

And he's the president here not the GM. Literally the same position he held when the Indians took a change in direction. And again, nothing like the Cubs situation with Theo

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

---

K... ~35%. Doesn’t change my stance. If you offer by far the most, you should land the FA. Thanks Rogers!

Houston blew it up like the Cubs did. Royals too, and the Cards. They all sucked for a while because they blew it up and built it up leading to a championship. All suplimented in Fa and trades, but built around a wave of talent making it to the ML at the same time.

We can disagree about the returns we could have gotten in 2016 for the prospects we had. No one really knows. I’m basing most of my theory off of the Zobrist offer and what aa had previously been able to do on the trade market, but I still don’t know what atkins would have been able to pull off so I could be wrong based on Atkins abilities at that time.

Not really sure why your point is about shapiro being president. I fully realize he wasn’t involved in baseball operations when the Indians did well, and I understand that he is president now.
He was actually VP in Cleveland, with no control of baseball decisions so that’s a different position than he is in now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChongInc.

K... ~35%. Doesn’t change my stance. If you offer by far the most, you should land the FA. Thanks Rogers!

Houston blew it up like the Cubs did. Royals too, and the Cards. They all sucked for a while because they blew it up and built it up leading to a championship. All suplimented in Fa and trades, but built around a wave of talent making it to the ML at the same time.

We can disagree about the returns we could have gotten in 2016 for the prospects we had. No one really knows. I’m basing most of my theory off of the Zobrist offer and what aa had previously been able to do on the trade market, but I still don’t know what atkins would have been able to pull off so I could be wrong based on Atkins abilities at that time.

Not really sure why your point is about shapiro being president. I fully realize he wasn’t involved in baseball operations when the Indians did well, and I understand that he is president now.
He was actually VP in Cleveland, with no control of baseball decisions so that’s a different position than he is in now.

---

I mean, he was the first GM to sign one of the top two or three FAs in what, twenty five years? FAs generally go to the place that offers the most too, BTW. So we disregard the majoirty of FA signings by most teams, then.

None of those situations are comparable to the Cubs. The Cubs had the sixth highest payroll when Epstein took over. Astros were middle of the pack the year before they lost 100 games in a row and the Royals just trade players in their prime making peanuts. They also built an elite bullpen that probably won them the WS.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/news/story?id=5647343

I really don't understand why you included Shapiro being named president of the Indians, with unlinked quotes, about the situation. I mean, the below article seems to paint a picture thats pretty close relationship to what is happening now in Toronto. Houston tore it down and were terrible for a number a years.

Quote:

---

Cleveland's front-office transition has actually been evolving over the past few seasons with Antonetti taking a more prominent role in the club's day-to-day operations, and Shapiro gradually branching into the business side of running the ballclub.

---

Quote:

---

Close friends and colleagues, Shapiro and Antonetti have shared the same vision for the Indians. And while their roles and titles have changed -- they'll both keep their old offices -- the pair will continue working together to try and bring Cleveland its first World Series title since 1948.

---

Quote:

---

Antonetti, whose career as a baseball executive began as an intern in Montreal's organization, said he intends to call upon Shapiro's expertise from time to time. Before making any trade or decision, Antonetti said he will continue to consult with the man who pulled off some of the biggest deals in franchise history.

---

Quote:

---

"I'd be foolish not to tap into Mark's experience," he said.

---

[QUOTE]The two may come to similar conclusions, but only after approaching problems differently. Antonetti is the more analytical of the two, relying on facts and figures to form the basis of his thinking. Shapiro, on the other hand, is more emotional and will often go on "feel" before making a decision.[QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Kenny Powders;33959348]I mean, he was the first GM to sign one of the top two or three FAs in what, twenty five years? FAs generally go to the place that offers the most too, BTW. So we disregard the majoirty of FA signings by most teams, then.

None of those situations are comparable to the Cubs. The Cubs had the sixth highest payroll when Epstein took over. Astros were middle of the pack the year before they lost 100 games in a row and the Royals just trade players in their prime making peanuts. They also built an elite bullpen that probably won them the WS.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/news/story?id=5647343

I really don't understand why you included Shapiro being named president of the Indians, with unlinked quotes, about the situation. I mean, the below article seems to paint a picture thats pretty close relationship to what is happening now in Toronto. Houston tore it down and were terrible for a number a years.






[QUOTE]The two may come to similar conclusions, but only after approaching problems differently. Antonetti is the more analytical of the two, relying on facts and figures to form the basis of his thinking. Shapiro, on the other hand, is more emotional and will often go on "feel" before making a decision.I think 6 years? Since we took one of the top FA on the market. Martin signed in 2014.
And I’m not disregarding any FA signings. I’m dictating where I give my own personal credit, and explaining why.

I cannot even believe I’m debating letting an old team fade into the darkness delaying the rebuild for several years (or at least lessening the strength of that youth wave with worse draft selections) so ownership can collect more of our misguided money VS being aggressive and getting assets for guys and adding top 5 draft picks to your talent wave.

If you take away the emotions I think you will agree that one is more likely to lead to a championship than the other.

Regardless I don’t think I have much to defend in the 2 statements of:
1) Atkins should have traded some of our prospects that didn’t end up becoming anything to bolster our run in 2016.
2) we would be closer to a championship right now if we blew it up in 2017 instead of spending an offseason building a mirage.

You can disagree, and I will listen. But I feel pretty confident in those 2 statements and I haven’t really wavered from them.

I threw that quote in because I was researching successful tear downs/rebuilds. They’re limited in baseball tbh, but the most recent ones that were done properly and committed to it (ownership) have been successful. That quote came up in reference to the indians, and I wanted to be very clear that I wasn’t giving shapiro credit for their success haha.

[QUOTE=ChongInc.;33959710][QUOTE=Kenny Powders;33959348]I mean, he was the first GM to sign one of the top two or three FAs in what, twenty five years? FAs generally go to the place that offers the most too, BTW. So we disregard the majoirty of FA signings by most teams, then.

None of those situations are comparable to the Cubs. The Cubs had the sixth highest payroll when Epstein took over. Astros were middle of the pack the year before they lost 100 games in a row and the Royals just trade players in their prime making peanuts. They also built an elite bullpen that probably won them the WS.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/news/story?id=5647343

I really don't understand why you included Shapiro being named president of the Indians, with unlinked quotes, about the situation. I mean, the below article seems to paint a picture thats pretty close relationship to what is happening now in Toronto. Houston tore it down and were terrible for a number a years.

Quote:

---

The two may come to similar conclusions, but only after approaching problems differently. Antonetti is the more analytical of the two, relying on facts and figures to form the basis of his thinking. Shapiro, on the other hand, is more emotional and will often go on "feel" before making a decision.

I think 6 years? Since we took one of the top FA on the market. Martin signed in 2014.
And I’m not disregarding any FA signings. I’m dictating where I give my own personal credit, and explaining why.

I cannot even believe I’m debating letting an old team fade into the darkness delaying the rebuild for several years (or at least lessening the strength of that youth wave with worse draft selections) so ownership can collect more of our misguided money VS being aggressive and getting assets for guys and adding top 5 draft picks to your talent wave.

If you take away the emotions I think you will agree that one is more likely to lead to a championship than the other.

Regardless I don’t think I have much to defend in the 2 statements of:
1) Atkins should have traded some of our prospects that didn’t end up becoming anything to bolster our run in 2016.
2) we would be closer to a championship right now if we blew it up in 2017 instead of spending an offseason building a mirage.

You can disagree, and I will listen. But I feel pretty confident in those 2 statements and I haven’t really wavered from them.

---

I never agreed with the path that was taken, but IMO that was a directive of ownership. Shapiro was officially hired on August 31, when the team was in the midst of a great run. When he was negotiating with Jays they were mired in another mediocre season. It's not a stretch to think that the ownership's directive changed pretty quickly. I lay that at the feet of ownership, not Shapiro.

In fact, I feel quite confident in the following statement:

At the end of 2015 it would have been best to blow it up and trade any MLB asset we had for futures. Our farm was in terrible shape, our core was aging and we had some bad contracts on the books.

As for Martin, he was probably a top 10 FA at the time. Springer was the best non pitcher available this deadline. And as great a game caller as Martin was, his impact on the offensive side doesn't even come close to what Springer's resume has on it.

And saying the rebuild has been delayed by several years is highly dramatic

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

[QUOTE=Kenny Powders;33960078][QUOTE=ChongInc.;33959710]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenny Powders

I mean, he was the first GM to sign one of the top two or three FAs in what, twenty five years? FAs generally go to the place that offers the most too, BTW. So we disregard the majoirty of FA signings by most teams, then.

None of those situations are comparable to the Cubs. The Cubs had the sixth highest payroll when Epstein took over. Astros were middle of the pack the year before they lost 100 games in a row and the Royals just trade players in their prime making peanuts. They also built an elite bullpen that probably won them the WS.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/news/story?id=5647343

I really don't understand why you included Shapiro being named president of the Indians, with unlinked quotes, about the situation. I mean, the below article seems to paint a picture thats pretty close relationship to what is happening now in Toronto. Houston tore it down and were terrible for a number a years.








I never agreed with the path that was taken, but IMO that was a directive of ownership. Shapiro was officially hired on August 31, when the team was in the midst of a great run. When he was negotiating with Jays they were mired in another mediocre season. It's not a stretch to think that the ownership's directive changed pretty quickly. I lay that at the feet of ownership, not Shapiro.

In fact, I feel quite confident in the following statement:

At the end of 2015 it would have been best to blow it up and trade any MLB asset we had for futures. Our farm was in terrible shape, our core was aging and we had some bad contracts on the books.

As for Martin, he was probably a top 10 FA at the time. Springer was the best non pitcher available this deadline. And as great a game caller as Martin was, his impact on the offensive side doesn't even come close to what Springer's resume has on it.

And saying the rebuild has been delayed by several years is highly dramatic

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

---

Martin top 10 FA? A lot higher then that imo. Top 5 easily imo.

And I’m saying they should have blown it up in 2017. They only actually tanked in 2019. 2 lost years of fake contending right there.

Do we want specs like warmoth, Pearson, zeuch? Or would we be better off with more Martins coming up right now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChongInc.

Martin top 10 FA? A lot higher then that imo. Top 5 easily imo.

And I’m saying they should have blown it up in 2017. They only actually tanked in 2019. 2 lost years of fake contending right there.

Do we want specs like warmoth, Pearson, zeuch? Or would we be better off with more Martins coming up right now?

---

Number 8 according to this and should have been #9 behind Nelson Cruz who led the MLB in HRs.

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/...edictions.html

[QUOTE=ChongInc.;33960173][QUOTE=Kenny Powders;33960078]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChongInc.

Martin top 10 FA? A lot higher then that imo. Top 5 easily imo.

And I’m saying they should have blown it up in 2017. They only actually tanked in 2019. 2 lost years of fake contending right there.

Do we want specs like warmoth, Pearson, zeuch? Or would we be better off with more Martins coming up right now?

---

Yeah he wasn't easily a top 5 FA. He brought a lot bot mostly what he brought were intangibles. He was very mediocre at the plate.

As for the tearing it down, I really don't know why your trying to convince me, I was all for tearing it down after 15. The writing was on the wall, we were an old overpaid team with essentially nothing in the farm.

And including Pearson with the likes of Zeuch and Warmoth is laughable. He may have a few injuries but he is still a highly regarded prospect while the other two are career AAAA players

We had the 2nd best odds to win the 2016 WS and 7th best odds for the 2017 WS. It was a short window of opportunity but pretty hard to tear that down.

Martin was ranked 7th best FA that offseason I believe and eas signed mainly for his defense/intangibles. He did have an elite bat for a C the year before with Pirates (290/403/430) but he had no history of showing that so it was expected he decline.

In the end we did overpay for him and it was expected he was only gonna give like 3 years of production.

You dont really need to tear down a star studded team because we had no farm. Both GMs got a top 10 farm within 3 years after having a thin farm (traded the farm in 2012 and had a top 10 farm entering 2015, traded the farm in 2015 and had a top 10 farm by entering 2018) so I was pretty comfortable riding that team until you couldnt because our farm was gonna be replenished quickly anyway.

If the team is a middling team without much upside them yea you should trade the team to replenish the farm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raps18-19 Champ

You dont really need to tear down a star studded team because we had no farm. Both GMs got a top 10 farm within 3 years after having a thin farm (traded the farm in 2012 and had a top 10 farm entering 2015, traded the farm in 2015 and had a top 10 farm by entering 2018) so I was pretty comfortable riding that team until you couldnt because our farm was gonna be replenished quickly anyway.

If the team is a middling team without much upside them yea you should trade the team to replenish the farm.

---

It's not just that we had no farm. The majority of our core were old, oft injured, expensive or a combo of the three. And we had no young cheap players that were any good on the team other then Osuna.

Do you honestly consider the '16 team to have been a "star studded one"?

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raps18-19 Champ

We had the 2nd best odds to win the 2016 WS and 7th best odds for the 2017 WS. It was a short window of opportunity but pretty hard to tear that down.

---

Before the season started. We were the best team in baseball in 2015 so that garnered us a good preseason rank but our was going to show. We had a lot of holes

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenny Powders

It's not just that we had no farm. The majority of our core were old, oft injured, expensive or a combo of the three. And we had no young cheap players that were any good on the team other then Osuna.

Do you honestly consider the '16 team to have been a "star studded one"?

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

---

Thee core was old but had guys like Stroman, Sanchez, Osuna, Pillar, Travis, and Goins coming off a good 2015 season. Obviously guys like Goins and Pillar werent great but were productive on the defensive end. Farm was thin but just signed Vlad who was a surefire top 10 and had Pompey, Alford, Tellez who were coming up and looked to be decent players even if not stars.

It does speaks loudly when people rather look at the team as being old than being productive. After 2015, I cant find indicators that say they werent able to be a legit WS contender team for 1-3 more years after that barring injury or steep declines (which unfortunately happened). I mean you wouldnt be lying to say its old but I did bring it up a few pages back how bad both sides are at this.