Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Win or Lose, Boston Celtics' New Big 3 Era A Success

OT: Is Brian Cashman Overrated?



In Friday's Open Off-Topic Thread, timlacy started a thread asking whether or not Brian Cashman was overrated.

I took the stance that he was, which drew a cyber eye-roll from Matt Klaassen (née* devil_fingers). As I stated in my response, I will gladly defer to Matt in general (one of us writes for FanGraphs; one of us does not), but then the discussion died. Am I off-base for believing Brian Cashman to be overrated?

Star-divide

*I'm aware that this is the feminine past participle of naitre in French, but I'm using the second definition - formerly known as - and simply do not know French to be able to conjugate this into a masculine form.

Admittedly, it is generally unpopular within this forum to come down on the same side as timlacy (and I'm not entirely sure that our respective rationales for believing this are coming from the place). This is clearly the first sign that I might be in the wrong on this issue. It is also obvious that given their respective situations, Brian Cashman is the better General Manager than Dayton Moore. He has a World Series Champions banner hanging in Yankee Stadium: The Squeakquel with a roster that is mostly his creation (Derek Jeter, Jorge Posada, and Mariano Rivera were all holdovers from a different GM, but Cashman did retain their services). 

After billybeingbilly's statement that the Yankees' system is "very good now," I posited the questions

How much of that is the hype-machine? How much of it is the Yankees FO misrepresenting information to drive up the value of their prospects?

I know this can sound like the insane musings of a crippled conspiracy theorist, and it did receive a dismissive "oh boy" from Mr. Klaassen to which I responded:

I'll gladly defer to you, but am I that far off? Cashman’s been in control since fall of 1998. What has their system produced in 12 years of limitless resources?

Do they not misrepresent information to their benefit? All teams do it to a degree, stating that Pitcher A was throwing x mph when really that pitcher was throwing x – 3 mph. Are the Yankees not known for this?

I have heard that the latter point is the case in regards to the Yankees, at least in passing. I admit I am no more in the know than most people here, but given the hype surrounding so many of the Yankees prospects that is left unrealized, the basis for such thinking would seem to be there.

Obviously, somewhere between a little bit and most of the hype that many of the Yankees top prospects get can be chalked up to the media market that they play in, but I've heard people who know a lot more than I do toss around the idea that the Yankees practice this to inflate the value of their prospects. Other teams do this, too. It is smart business practice, especially if that player can be turned around based on this misinformation. The memories of most fans are short enough that these lies can generally be assumed to have been forgotten after awhile anyway. I know there was a prospect this year from another team who saw his status rise on a prospect expert's list because of such an exaggeration. 

With regards to their system, my analysis (if you can call it that) is admittedly superficial. And, as Matt noted in response to this comment (snarkily - appropriate for RR, I suppose), I overlooked Brett Gardner (but not Robinson Cano). I think the points that follow have some verity to them.

Honestly, I would argue that they can always afford to overpay for both Latin American amateur talent and guys with signability concerns, yet just on a gut level, the system doesn’t seem to produce much Major League talent. The hype machine blows the prospects up, but if we go back to 1999 and look at what they have produced, it is relatively insubstantial considering the limitless resources.

And, yes, they have always been drafting at the end of the first round, but that disadvantage is at least mostly negated by how much money they can spend in Latin America. Even the pieces they have traded off at the deadline have been mostly unimpressive.

When a system with seemingly limitless resources has churned out only Robinson Cano insofar as top talent is concerned, there might be a shortcoming. Sure, [Phil] Hughes seems to show promise (his first half of 2010 was a mirage), but Joba [Chamberlain] has been pretty uninspiring. Of the guys they’ve traded, maybe [Jose] Tabata will be good, Austin Jackson is not nearly as good as he appeared to be last year, and then you have to go back to Ted Lilly, who they traded for after he’d already made it to the Majors or Jake Westbrook who had already pitched in Double-A when they acquired him from Montreal and then shipped off to Cleveland in the David Justice deal.

I’d even argue that his free agent acquisition skills are overrated.

When made aware that I had omitted Gardner, I stated

Admittedly I forgot to mention Gardner, but to be honest I kind of hate him, and he has produced for a year and a half. Much of that value is from his defense, as well.

My main issue with the sh**bag is the fact that sliding into first to beat out a single is asinine, yet everyone fellated him for it in the playoffs. Multiple times. Grit factor. Lame.

Apologies for some of the language therein, I censored the curse word for the faint of heart. Almost all of Gardner's value is from his defense, and that defense is in left field, the second least important position on the field. He is a very, very good defensive left fielder, though.

In regards to the free agent acquisition skills, or lack thereof, Cashman has been playing with house money and a stacked deck (and a bunch of other hackneyed cliches indicating an unfair advantage). With this in his favor, he has handed out horrible contracts to the likes of Javier Vazquez, Carl Pavano, and A.J. Burnett (which I wrote about at length when it was inked here). In the latter two instances, the deals seemed bad when they were inked. More importantly, even the contracts that they hand out to vets who pan out initially are immovable albatrosses by the last few years of the deals.

The real problem to me is that they are playing with a largely broken business model. They outspend every other team by at least $50MM. Even with chance coming into play, when your payroll is at least 1.33 times higher than your next closest opponent, the expectation of winning should expectantly be higher, and the one World Series trophy in the last ten years really is not enough.

The reason this is the case is that their team has been comprised of not just mercenaries but aging veterans on the decline from their peak phase. By the time nearly every player on the roster is donning pinstripes, they have likely already played their best season. Maybe there is less uncertainty with these players, as they have definitely already produced on the Major League level (otherwise the Yankees would not be offering insane contracts to them), but they are also more than likely going to be producing less than the average player who is in his third to sixth season in the Majors.

Maybe I'm off-base here, and I welcome everybody's criticism. Also, I apologize for copying so much from the comments section of another FanPost, especially if you already read and dismissed it. Normally, I would have just posted this at my blog (shameless plug), but it seemed like this was the most likely place for it to get read and receive feedback. Furthermore, I haven't been religiously reading every FanPost, FanShot, and Comment, so maybe this has already been covered ad nauseum - if so, I apologize for that as well.

So, readers: Am I wrong? Is Brian Cashman either properly rated or underrated? Am I insane and blinded from an objective standpoint regarding the Evil Empire?

Comment 61 comments  |  2 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I think he's properly rated

Though, like a GM with an owner who spends nothing, it’s kinda hard to evaluate him. I don’t think he’s had full autonomy all the time.

by Freneau on Feb 6, 2011 8:09 PM EST reply actions  

When I was initially thinking about writing this,

I thought about interference from ownership but then forgot to include anything in the post. Great oversight on my part… I wouldn’t be sure how to properly account from such hands-on ownership anyway.

It does seem like if their system had been producing at least some talent that they would not need to be trading for whichever Pending Free Agent at a Position of Need From a Team Not In Contention they deem necessary, but I suppose this could be chalked up to meddlesome ownership.

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 6, 2011 8:17 PM EST up reply actions  

I think that's more than just meddlesome ownership.

I think that’s also a fanbase and an organizational philosophy (which, granted, starts with ownership) that has a WIN NOW mentality every single year. I mean, I know theoretically all teams do come Spring Training, but we know that’s not reality and that certain sacrifices will NOT be made by most teams to win now. I think probably the Red Sox and Phillies have this to a certain extent, but no organization has it the way the Yankees do. And of course none of the other organizations can afford to have that mentality.

Probably why I hate them so much. Don’t mind the “drive” so much as the freaking sense of entitlement about it. So, here is my weekly FUCK YOU YANKEES.

by Gross(est) on Feb 6, 2011 8:31 PM EST up reply actions  

Okay, finally read the article.

First, I have no idea if he’s properly rated or not because I’m not really aware of what the general consensus on him is, but I will definitely agree with some of the critiques you mentioned:
-the signing the old, proven guys from whom you won’t be getting their peak, even if you are getting a “real” major leaguer.
-the lack of the system really contributing much (although I should admit I’m not really aware of what prospects are coming out of that system that have been traded to other teams and how they are producing in the majors). I think another wrinkle in the “system producing” critique is that the Yankees expect each player to perform at such a high level pretty early – I mean, if you’re on the Yankees, you are pretty much expected to be a superstar because everyone else on the team is, so that doesn’t leave a lot of room for rookies to come in and get their feet wet. I don’t think their major league team is constructed in such a way as to make it conducive for rookies to break in unless they are potential superstars, like Cano.
-I agree with whomever said that players sliding into first base should be flogged unless they are doing it to avoid a collision.

I feel like I’m not really adding much to the discussion, but I hate football so I’m kind of bored tonight. Should have hit the library earlier and got myself a new book.

by Gross(est) on Feb 6, 2011 9:08 PM EST reply actions  

I did look at all of every trade going back to at least 2000

and the players I listed were the only notable players shipped off elsewhere, unless you consider Ian Kennedy as notable.
It really does seem like a system with as much a presence in Latin America as the Yankees should have produced more talent. Again, I am by no means an expert when it comes to prospecting, but at a basic level it seems like really any system should have produced more than an admittedly great second baseman, a plus-defender in left (with a bat that profiles as a decent leadoff hitter), and then two mostly disappointing young pitchers. Sure, that disappointment stems from those high expectations, but Hughes is coming off two 2.4 WAR seasons, and Joba is coming off two sub-2.0 WAR seasons after peaking at 3.3 WAR in 2008. Joba was 0.1 WAR more valuable than Chen last year. Most would argue, that’s not very good.

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 6, 2011 9:25 PM EST up reply actions  

Its not just that though...

The Royals system only has 2 top picks making up their list. Everyone else was found later on, so why didn’t the Yankees take Wil Myers early and pay him too much?

Your 2010 Royals Review Fantasy Football Keeper League Champion
Pitchers and Catchers report Feb 13, 2011

by averagegatsby on Feb 6, 2011 10:59 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

^ this

Agreed. Granted, we can play that game to the point of tedium, and we still do not know that Wil Myers will be a legit MLer. Still, the point remains that despite signability never being a factor, their system has not produced what it probably should have since Cashman took over.

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 7, 2011 12:27 AM EST up reply actions  

Yeah, I don't think the "late in the first round" is any excuse.

How many first rounders never make it to the majors? How many more don’t make much of an impact? Obviously, a decent system should be finding talent in the later rounds and should be able to develop that talent into something. Like I said, I have no idea really how Cashman is perceived, but this thread is making me think he sucks.

by Gross(est) on Feb 7, 2011 2:11 AM EST up reply actions  

I don't ever remember Cashman being rated that highly by anyone that wasn't a Yankees homer...

I don’t think he is that good of a GM, but Im not sure he is any worse than just about every other GM.

Your 2010 Royals Review Fantasy Football Keeper League Champion
Pitchers and Catchers report Feb 13, 2011

by averagegatsby on Feb 6, 2011 10:57 PM EST reply actions  

I really get the sense

that Cashman is well regarded outside of Yankee-dom.

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 7, 2011 12:28 AM EST up reply actions  

Like you defer to Klaassen I will defer to you...

But I have never heard this. I’ve merely heard that he is what he is.

Your 2010 Royals Review Fantasy Football Keeper League Champion
Pitchers and Catchers report Feb 13, 2011

by averagegatsby on Feb 7, 2011 4:25 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah, I think he's well regarded by most

At least those who know enough about baseball to know the name of a GM. Average fans think he’s good because his team wins consistently. Sabermetric analysts think he’s good because he makes smart moves.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Feb 7, 2011 4:54 PM EST up reply actions  

He does seem to have a Jedi mind trick ability

Of getting teams to give him pretty good players without having to give up much on his own. Thinking of the Granderson, Swisher and Vazquez deals in particular.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 7, 2011 5:02 PM EST up reply actions  

Swisher

was coming off a really bad season, too. He triple-slashed .219/.332/.410 on the South Side. His BABIP was .249 (his career mark is .286), but do any of us think that Kenny Williams knows the implication of that?

This was a good trade, and a rare example of him buying low.

As for Granderson, the Tigers seemed deadset on slashing payroll. This played to Cashman’s advantage.

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 7, 2011 5:21 PM EST up reply actions  

Trust me, no need for deferment here

My assumption is that there are the Friedmans, Beanes, and Epsteins, and then after the top tier of elite GMs you’ve got Cashman. Maybe I’m off-base, and over-rating the rating of Cashman if that makes sense.

I think it is mostly that I don’t think he is that good at his job. Every GM job is different to be sure, but it seems like he has absolutely everything going for him and doesn’t get the according results. I’m sure I’m being unrealistic to expect this, but the Yankees have spent over $200MM for four years running, signability is never a concern for draft picks, and they seem to have a lot of reach in the amateur LA free agent market. This isn’t even taking into account the Yankee brand when it comes to enticing free agents to sign there.

Yes, statistically other teams should be expected to beat the Yankees, but they have one WS win since 2000. The difference to me seems to be the fact that a lot of those players on the 1996 – 2000 teams were homegrown and now they’re all acquired via free agency. And I’m not taking some hokey homegrown players are great feelgood mentality, but the highest value a player has seems to me to be in the last three years of club control (generally speaking, of course).

That he hasn’t been able to identify this or convince ownership of this seems to me to be a fatal flaw.

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 7, 2011 4:57 PM EST up reply actions  

I kind of feel the same way...

He probably should have done more, but its not like he has done a bad job.

Your 2010 Royals Review Fantasy Football Keeper League Champion
Pitchers and Catchers report Feb 13, 2011

by averagegatsby on Feb 7, 2011 5:52 PM EST up reply actions  

Good post

just for the record: I’m just a person who likes baseball, just like (I assume) most everyone here. Where I do or don’t write has no bearing on the force of my arguments (or the argumentative force of my snark). I’m generally suspicious of appeals to authority (even if I realize that they can’t be fully eliminated), especially when I have a pretty good idea just how full of crap that particular “authority” is.

Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Feb 6, 2011 11:52 PM EST reply actions   1 recs

Thanks

For clarification, I don’t know if I was appealing to authority, per se (assuming I’m reading the comment correctly). I did think that the topic could be fruitful for further debate/conversation, which was the primary motivation for writing the post, especially given the fact that there actually seemed to be contrasting viewpoints within the discussion, short as it was.

I know that for me personally (and I don’t think I’m alone on this), the words of some of the commenters carry more weight than others. Reputations through consistency in comment history and, yes, where you write do have a little bearing on how things are read here. On a fundamental level, this may be wrong, but I think bias is inherent.

I appreciate that you’re taking the piss out of yourself – the self-deprecation is amusing – but there is a reason you write for FanGraphs. You’re good. A dismissive comment from you does carry more weight than it would from a relative newb.

As for the snark, it isn’t isolated to you. This may be the snarkiest place on the internet. Usually it isn’t trained on me, so maybe I took it a little worse than most. That said, it’s one of the main reasons I come here, and it is impossible to maintain one’s sanity while being a Royals fan without it. It also makes the live game threads hilarious.

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 7, 2011 2:56 AM EST up reply actions   1 recs

I can see both sides of the argument, so I guess he’s somewhere near properly rated.

The time where snark is necessary for a Royals fan to maintain their sanity is nearing it’s end. I wonder if some that have used it as a crutch for so long will be able to make the transition, or will we be left with snarky comments and articles about a team that doesn’t really deserve it.

by sfeldkamp on Feb 7, 2011 8:28 AM EST up reply actions  

Probably the latter

prepare your angry letter to SBNation management now.

Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Feb 7, 2011 8:52 AM EST up reply actions  

Yeah

I do wonder how well we’ll all be able to handle it if/when the Royals are actually respectable (note: was not able to go so far as to say good).

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 7, 2011 11:49 AM EST up reply actions  

How good will they have to be for snark to become inappropriate?

There’s still a long way to go for this team to become a playoff team. I think there will be lots of room for snark, particularly if Moore’s FA and trade acquisitions don’t pan out. And I think there’s a decent chance of that happening.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Feb 7, 2011 12:37 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah,

I place the likelihood for those acquisitions panning out somewhere around 85%, unless all of the players he scouted when with the Braves have been clouding his judgment so much that once the emotional attachment to those players is gone he is somehow miraculously objective.

Should we start praying?

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 7, 2011 12:43 PM EST up reply actions  

Dayton prays

And it's worked for him so far.

But then again, maybe he only prays for the prospects.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Feb 7, 2011 1:06 PM EST up reply actions  

I'd say he prays for more people than that.

I bet he even prays for fans like us.

Now with 30% less snark!

by Karte on Feb 9, 2011 6:32 AM EST up reply actions  

Jesus

I forgot a very operative word here:

I place the likelihood for those acquisitions NOT somewhere around 85%

I assure you I am not some insane homer, which given my relative inactivity here would be something you couldn’t know.

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 7, 2011 8:12 PM EST up reply actions  

I assumed as much. I don’t think even those who like DM the most think he’ll ever have even an 85% FA success rate.

You may know me as NYRoyal.

by Scott McKinney on Feb 7, 2011 10:16 PM EST up reply actions  

Facebook taps you on the shoulder,

and as you turn around -

PUNCHES YOU IN THE FACE

The whole problem with the world is that fools & fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts. ~ Bertrand Russell

by SagehenMacGyver47 on Feb 8, 2011 1:30 PM EST up reply actions  

Right

I may be the most “homeric” person on this site, and I don’t think anything close to 85% will happen. Of course, we would have to launch into a full-blown discussion about what qualifies as “success” to really get a percentage.

Now with 30% less snark!

by Karte on Feb 9, 2011 6:30 AM EST up reply actions  

Not only that...

But even if the team gets good, there will always be a place to poke fun…

Something tells me Giants fans were doom and gloom all the way to the World Series, and at some point next year they will all be convinced that there has never been a worse team and that their championship was a fluke

Your 2010 Royals Review Fantasy Football Keeper League Champion
Pitchers and Catchers report Feb 13, 2011

by averagegatsby on Feb 7, 2011 4:51 PM EST up reply actions  

I maintain that Snark is a coping mechanism

If we couldn’t amuse ourselves with it there really wouldn’t be any point in following the team at all… Other than you know the love of baseball.

Your 2010 Royals Review Fantasy Football Keeper League Champion
Pitchers and Catchers report Feb 13, 2011

by averagegatsby on Feb 7, 2011 4:41 PM EST up reply actions  

Seeing as though this is maybe the second time I posted anything here (the other one was about TV, IIRC), I figured that since this wasn’t explicitly about the Royals that it was off-topic.

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 7, 2011 12:24 AM EST up reply actions  

I the MLB network, they discussed that there are some rumblings that he would like to go elsewhere.

He believes in a minor system and what prospects can get, but the owners don’t. The problem with no prospects is that they have a problem getting players mid season because no rebuilding team wants an over priced aging veteran, the want cost controlled prospects. Boston understands this and is loading their system up and can trade for players like Gonzalez. The Yankees don’t have the volume of prospects to do this. Boston is setting themselves up for a nice run against the Yankees and Cashman could be gone because of it.

- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …

by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 7, 2011 11:31 AM EST reply actions  

Now I don't think anyone could argue

with what Theo Epstein has done. There is a GM.

It is kind of the GM’s job to rein in ownership if their thinking is flawed. This would at least have to qualify as a shortcoming on some level, although the blame is somewhat dependent on unquant-/unqualifiable measures.

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 7, 2011 11:55 AM EST up reply actions  

arod, granderson and swisher were all acquired via trade....

are there any other teams who’ve traded for more good players?

Fire Everyone

by billybeingbilly on Feb 7, 2011 1:00 PM EST up reply actions  

Swisher was had for nothing, too

Vazquez wasn’t a great trade, but his total collapse was pretty much impossible for foresee, given that he had been good for years, and was a legit Cy Young candidate in 2009. And so on.

I don’t know how Cashman would operate in another context, but he’s done well for the Yankees. Yes, he has lots of money to work with, but he makes mostly good decisions with it.

Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Feb 7, 2011 1:03 PM EST up reply actions  

RE: Vazquez

The first or second collapse in NYC?

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 7, 2011 2:25 PM EST up reply actions  

You are right, I forgot "Vazquez can't pitch in New York"

It’s a basic principle of forecasting that one season six years in the past is more relevant based on location than the five seasons in between.

Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Feb 7, 2011 3:52 PM EST up reply actions  

No

but it would serve to indicate that it wasn’t pretty much impossible.

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 7, 2011 4:18 PM EST up reply actions  

And

While I’ll grant you 2010 being an outlier, so too is 2009.

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 7, 2011 4:20 PM EST up reply actions  

Javy, "Outliers," and Three Varieties of WAR, 2003-2010

FanGraphs (FIP):

2003: 6.0
2004: 2.2
2005: 3.6
2006: 4.8
2007: 5.1
2008: 4.9
2009: 6.5
2010: -0.2

B-R (RA Adjusted for Defense):
2003: 5.4
2004: 2.3
2005: 2.0
2006: 2.6
2007: 5.9
2008: 3.1
2009: 5.2
2010: 0.0

Stat Corner (tRA, only goes back to 2007):
2007: 6.2
2008: 6.0
2009: 5.7
2010: 0.0

Javy has been controversial, but I’m thinking the main sign of something going wrong in 2010 was that after consistently throwing his fastball 91-92 for most of the decade, it was in the 88-89 territory in 2010.

Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Feb 7, 2011 4:53 PM EST up reply actions  

Admittedly, my Vazquez analysis was cursory,

but I was talking mostly about his ERA/FIP/xFIP splits when talking about the outlier season of 2009. I get that WAR is the best (or at least most concise) performance evaluator, but I was mostly looking at the Cy Young comment. I think the CY support was driven by his sub-3.00 ERA. I think you’ll agree that at least in those figures (and the strikeout figures as well) that these were statistical outliers. Maybe not to the extreme that 2010 was an outlier, and I doubt that Cashman was looking at a then-33-year-old Javier Vazquez to repeat 2009, but I think there was some cause to look at least a little skeptically in a weaker league and a middling division (the Mets and Nats were awful, the Phillies great, and the Marlins outplayed their Pythagorean by 10 games to get to 87 – 75).

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 7, 2011 5:17 PM EST up reply actions  

Well, the Cy Young thing wasn't about the voting, but my opinion that it was a legitimately great season

and the WAR numbers are adjusted in various ways to account for league and park and stuff. Moreover, the 2009 DIPS (FIP/tRA) numbers aren’t that far off from his numbers from the previous seasons.

Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Feb 7, 2011 5:19 PM EST up reply actions  

Cool.

I’m never entirely sure what all is factored to some of the less widely touted metrics. I mean I know what tRA means, but not how it’s figured or whether or not park factors are normalized or not.

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 7, 2011 5:23 PM EST up reply actions  

Maybe I’m being needlessly contrarian, but doesn’t it seem like he is always just trading for the best guy available at whatever position they deem a point of need?

I do think there are a lot of questionable decisions that he makes with this money. It will be hard for that A-Rod contract to be worth what they’re paying him, even with the lowering of the annual salary as the contract plays out into the season in which he turns 42. The Jeter money seems wasteful, as well. There is still time, but the A.J. Burnett deal has looked like a bad one since the moment it was signed. Jorge Posada is set to make $13.1MM again this season. There has been only one year on his current four-year deal that he has outperformed his salary according to FanGraphs’ numbers. It is hard to imagine Mark Teixeira playing at a $22.5MM performance level for the next six season. He didn’t in year two of the deal. Will Sabathia be worth $23MM per year through 2015? In year two of his contract, he wasn’t.

I understand that to a certain extent the money doesn’t matter as much for the Yankees, and the value in these long-term deals lies in the early years of the contract. In 2013 though, they will be paying the following players the following amounts:
Alex Rodriguez – $28MM
Derek Jeter – $17MM
Mark Teixeira – $22.5MM
Carsten Charles Sabathia – $23MM
A.J. Burnett – $16.5MM
Rafael Soriano – $14MM
Sabathia is the youngest of those players, turning 33 that July. That is $121MM on the books in 2013 for six players who are certainly unlikely to give the Yankees $121MM worth of performance. If we need a reminder of how these contracts can go, do we need to look any farther (further?) than Jason Giambi, whose contract was $36.8MM more than his performance bore out.

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 7, 2011 3:13 PM EST up reply actions  

One of the Steinbrenner boys did the Arod deal. Cashman wanted to play hardball with Jeter, he was overruled. Cashman didnt want Soriano, he was overruled. Thats $59 million that you cant blame on him.

Fire Everyone

by billybeingbilly on Feb 7, 2011 5:10 PM EST up reply actions  

I’ll give you that, at least to an extent. I do think it is his job to lay the case for or against something. In these three cases, I think he came up short of doing that.

Maybe there has also been meddling all along. It seems like Cashman is actively trying to assure that he has a change in scenery after 2011. It just seems to me that their business model has been broken since about 2000, and whether it is his fault or not (not unlike like Allard Baird), he has been the GM this whole time.

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 7, 2011 5:36 PM EST up reply actions  

the business model that makes the playoffs ever year in the toughest division in baseball?

that makes the steinbrenners huge profits? seems like a pretty successful business model no matter how you define it.

Fire Everyone

by billybeingbilly on Feb 7, 2011 6:03 PM EST up reply actions  

I was using the term business model a little loosely.

I suppose I meant ‘method by which ultimate success is attained’ if we’re nitpicking, which I’ve certainly been guilty of in this thread.

Obviously they make a shit-ton of money, but the means by which they construct a roster and fill out their farm system seems fundamentally flawed to me.

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 7, 2011 7:49 PM EST up reply actions  

I think he is properly rated

He is pretty good, but not great. He has had a tremendous amount of resources obviously, but he’s used those resources wisely, as opposed to other franchises with tremendous resources (Mets, Dodgers, Cubs) who have squandered those resources.

People forget that even in the halcyon days of the 1980s when small market teams could “compete”, the Yanks were still the team aggressively going after FAs. The problem was they were just terrible at identifying good FAs, wasting money by overpaying on mediocre talent like Eric Show, Steve Farr, Ed Whitson and Danny Tartabull. And they comically traded a huge wealth of prospects away that turned into great or at least useful players – Doug Drabek, Fred McGriff, Jose Rijo, Hal Morris, Steve Balboni, Dan Pasqua, Willie McGee, Bob Tewksbury, Jay Buhner (Frank Costanza had a conniption over that!)

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 7, 2011 4:39 PM EST reply actions  

I think the question comes from whether he could be a good GM when forced to work in the typical scenario (without the NYY resources)

Like you say he’s been good at using his resources wisely, but we don’t have much evidence that he does/doesn’t know how to do the things a GM would have to do without the ability to plug ML roster holes with FA.
My personal opinion is that his understocked MiLB system points toward a flaw is his “good GM” rep. But at the same time, if the current ML season is what matters year-in-year-out, then it’s hard to say if the lack of emphasis on the minors is really something he has/should/could focus on.

The whole problem with the world is that fools & fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts. ~ Bertrand Russell

by SagehenMacGyver47 on Feb 7, 2011 5:05 PM EST up reply actions  

Sure

I wouldn’t hire him to run a small market club, but if I were the Mets or Cubs, I’d definitely want him.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Feb 7, 2011 5:38 PM EST up reply actions  

Yes, I didn't really state my conclusion, which was

that if someone thinks that: if Cashman is available, any team should snag him up as their GM – then I don’t agree with that.

The whole problem with the world is that fools & fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts. ~ Bertrand Russell

by SagehenMacGyver47 on Feb 7, 2011 6:23 PM EST up reply actions  

sure

I just object to things like “anyone could have won with that kind of money” kind of dismissals of Cashman.

Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Feb 7, 2011 7:33 PM EST up reply actions  

I hope I'm not coming across as being that extreme,

and it is entirely possible that I am guilty of incorrectly gauging his standing in the realm of baseball general managers, which I am estimating to be somewhere around the top of the second tier of GMs.

This SI article from just prior to the 2010 season has Cashman ranked third, behind only Friedman and Epstein. In response to this article, Craig Calcaterra said that he’d rank Cashman #1. One article and a reaction doth not a consensus make, but I would certainly prefer most of the rest of that Top 10 (not Kenny Williams), and I would think about a few of the GMs ranked below that as well.

Maybe I’m also being overly skeptical of the current state of the Yankees’ farm system today – I certainly was with the Royals heading into last year – which could be negatively coloring my impression of his job performance as a whole.

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 7, 2011 8:07 PM EST up reply actions  

How could I not Rec a post I unintentionally inspired?

I must confess that I laid down the “Cashman is over-rated” statement merely to be provocative. That said, it contained a 50 percent impression on my end.

If we could somehow create a Frankenstein GM, I’d take Cashman’s ML roster ability and combine it GMDM’s farm system renovation and Beane’s willingness to think outside the box.

Otherwise, great post. …And don’t worry about my popularity, because I don’t. :) – TL

"Sir,--It has been wittily remarked that there are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third and most aggravated is statistics." *The National Observer* (June 13, 1891): p. 93-94.

by timlacy on Feb 8, 2011 4:28 PM EST reply actions   1 recs

I figured your posed the question to be a provocateur.

Honestly, if you and some of the other voices in here weren’t present, the debate would be incredibly tedious. Your presence is valuable, even if the majority of the regulars don’t often find themselves in agreement with you.

Hating life as a Royals fan 365 days a year at Royalscentricity

by Old Man Duggan on Feb 8, 2011 8:14 PM EST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Kansas City Royals.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Royalsretro_small
Would Royals Review Make Better Decisions Than Dayton Moore?
Funny-tattoos-hey-look-they-found-a-royals-fan_small
Mitch On the Bench
Royalsretro_small
Happy Mother's Day From Royals Review

Recent FanPosts

Dignan_small
Friday Game 43 Open Thread
Funny-tattoos-hey-look-they-found-a-royals-fan_small
MORE Mitch on the Bench
Sexy-beast-original_small
OT Friday: The generic boilerplate template desert island gambit
Tumblr_lwfiy4qkgv1r204zxo1_500_small
RR Poetry Contest
Small
Extrapolating the First 43 Games over the Full Season
Small
Is Dave Eiland doing ... anything?
Small
Alcides Escobar's Bat
Download_small
Was Dayton Moore Right on Bruce Chen?
Chalmers2_small
2012 Royals vs 2012 Ex-Royals

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Yahoo_full_count

Managers

Cimg0036_small Freneau

Editors

Dayton_small Jeff Zimmerman

Authors

Royalsretro_small RoyalsRetro

Headshot_small Old Man Duggan