SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Tony LaRussa to join Red Sox front office
|
Post by grandsalami on Nov 1, 2017 21:27:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 1, 2017 21:52:27 GMT -5
We're going old school.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Nov 1, 2017 22:38:21 GMT -5
I mean, why not?
|
|
|
Post by dirtdog on Nov 1, 2017 22:46:04 GMT -5
Sounds like a Frank Wren type move. DD puts a buddy on the payroll. Dont think it hurts but not sure it has much impact at all.
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Nov 2, 2017 6:42:33 GMT -5
Please let us finish in last place so we can end this charade and bring in a real GM.
|
|
|
Post by prangerx on Nov 2, 2017 7:17:15 GMT -5
Not really a fan of the move. His FO run in Arizona was a disaster. But I suppose he won't do much damage as an advisor. I worry about the pedlium being shifted too Old School.
|
|
|
Post by swingingbunt on Nov 2, 2017 7:50:40 GMT -5
Not really a fan of the move. His FO run in Arizona was a disaster. But I suppose he won't do much damage as an advisor. I worry about the pedlium being shifted too Old School. Was it (I'm genuinely asking)? I know the Miller deal was bad bad, but the DBacks made the playoffs this season so it doesn't seem like he set them back THAT far.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Nov 2, 2017 8:04:31 GMT -5
It's Insider Only, but Keith Law's takedown of the LaRussa/Stewart Diamondbacks was pretty illustrative: www.espn.com/blog/keith-law/insider/post?id=5515My biggest issue with bringing on LaRussa in a role like this is his reputation for being openly antagonistic to those who disagree with him. He's never been a "Team of Rivals" type of dude, who can have his professional disagreements without making them personal. On a team with so many big personalities and guys with resumes: Dombrowski, Baird, Wren, not to mention O'Halloran and Romero - it's easy to think having LaRussa's attitude there could make things toxic if things go sideways. Like, why would you want this guy in your organization as a one-of-many "advisor"? deadspin.com/tony-la-russa-invades-pirates-broadcast-booth-during-ga-1778900260He was a good manager, but an extraordinarily bad executive, both as a talent evaluator and in terms of the temperament necessary to do the job well. He's the worst person possible for the job he is apparently getting.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Nov 2, 2017 9:15:48 GMT -5
You know what the number one sign of an effective executive is? When he keeps giving jobs to questionably qualified candidates who happen to be his buddies.
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Nov 2, 2017 9:35:59 GMT -5
It's Insider Only, but Keith Law's takedown of the LaRussa/Stewart Diamondbacks was pretty illustrative: www.espn.com/blog/keith-law/insider/post?id=5515My biggest issue with bringing on LaRussa in a role like this is his reputation for being openly antagonistic to those who disagree with him. He's never been a "Team of Rivals" type of dude, who can have his professional disagreements without making them personal. On a team with so many big personalities and guys with resumes: Dombrowski, Baird, Wren, not to mention O'Halloran and Romero - it's easy to think having LaRussa's attitude there could make things toxic if things go sideways. Like, why would you want this guy in your organization as a one-of-many "advisor"? deadspin.com/tony-la-russa-invades-pirates-broadcast-booth-during-ga-1778900260He was a good manager, but an extraordinarily bad executive, both as a talent evaluator and in terms of the temperament necessary to do the job well. He's the worst person possible for the job he is apparently getting. Short answer: Because the guy who calls the shots shares his philosophy on baseball. This is what John Henry has allowed his franchise to become.
|
|
ianrs
Veteran
Posts: 2,421
|
Post by ianrs on Nov 2, 2017 10:01:42 GMT -5
God, this is awful and a further indictment of DD.
|
|
|
Post by prangerx on Nov 2, 2017 10:14:58 GMT -5
I like The move even worse now because he seems to be more than just an advisor.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 2, 2017 10:41:40 GMT -5
I like The move even worse now because he seems to be more than just an advisor. For what it's worth, the title of Vice President/Special Assistant to the President of Baseball Operations appears to not be that high on the totem pole in the grand scheme of things. The Red Sox organization has 4 executive VPs and 8 senior VPs who all, presumably, outrank La Russa. As it relates to the on-field product, none of the Executive VPs factor in, but there are 4 Senior VPs: Baird, Romero, O'Halloran, and Wren. Vice Presidents include guys like Bannister, Zack Scott, Crockett, Banner, Quattlebaum, and Rikard. It appears that La Russa, in terms of rank on the totem pole, is equal to those guys, so he's not being brought in as Dombrowski's right-hand man. Given La Russa's experience, I don't think you could've brought him in at any level below this. In terms of having another voice in decision making, I'm not against that. The question is how Dombrowski will filter that.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Nov 2, 2017 10:47:44 GMT -5
Lol, I didn't think the move was all that bad. Been a fan of Dombrowski's work the past year actually. His first year was definitely questionable here.
I love reading the comments on here though.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Nov 2, 2017 11:12:35 GMT -5
I like The move even worse now because he seems to be more than just an advisor. For what it's worth, the title of Vice President/Special Assistant to the President of Baseball Operations appears to not be that high on the totem pole in the grand scheme of things. The Red Sox organization has 4 executive VPs and 8 senior VPs who all, presumably, outrank La Russa. As it relates to the on-field product, none of the Executive VPs factor in, but there are 4 Senior VPs: Baird, Romero, O'Halloran, and Wren. Vice Presidents include guys like Bannister, Zack Scott, Crockett, Banner, Quattlebaum, and Rikard. It appears that La Russa, in terms of rank on the totem pole, is equal to those guys, so he's not being brought in as Dombrowski's right-hand man. Given La Russa's experience, I don't think you could've brought him in at any level below this. In terms of having another voice in decision making, I'm not against that. The question is how Dombrowski will filter that.I think the question you have to ask is if LaRussa has anything of value to contribute to that group in the first place, and I'm by no means convinced that he does.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Nov 2, 2017 11:17:09 GMT -5
I think the question you have to ask is if LaRussa has anything of value to contribute to that group in the first place, and I'm by no means convinced that he does. Because of one bad stint with the Diamondbacks?
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Nov 2, 2017 11:24:11 GMT -5
I mean, the guy was a pretty good manager with the Cardinals. He invented the usage of situational relievers out of the bullpen from what I remember.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 2, 2017 11:39:17 GMT -5
What a front office is responsible for and what a coaching staff is responsible for has very little overlap. LaRussa strikes me as someone who is very good at one and not the other.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Nov 2, 2017 11:41:36 GMT -5
It's Insider Only, but Keith Law's takedown of the LaRussa/Stewart Diamondbacks was pretty illustrative: www.espn.com/blog/keith-law/insider/post?id=5515My biggest issue with bringing on LaRussa in a role like this is his reputation for being openly antagonistic to those who disagree with him. He's never been a "Team of Rivals" type of dude, who can have his professional disagreements without making them personal. On a team with so many big personalities and guys with resumes: Dombrowski, Baird, Wren, not to mention O'Halloran and Romero - it's easy to think having LaRussa's attitude there could make things toxic if things go sideways. Like, why would you want this guy in your organization as a one-of-many "advisor"? deadspin.com/tony-la-russa-invades-pirates-broadcast-booth-during-ga-1778900260He was a good manager, but an extraordinarily bad executive, both as a talent evaluator and in terms of the temperament necessary to do the job well. He's the worst person possible for the job he is apparently getting. Translation: "Great baseball man." Cafardo will be elated.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 2, 2017 12:38:01 GMT -5
It's Insider Only, but Keith Law's takedown of the LaRussa/Stewart Diamondbacks was pretty illustrative: www.espn.com/blog/keith-law/insider/post?id=5515My biggest issue with bringing on LaRussa in a role like this is his reputation for being openly antagonistic to those who disagree with him. He's never been a "Team of Rivals" type of dude, who can have his professional disagreements without making them personal. On a team with so many big personalities and guys with resumes: Dombrowski, Baird, Wren, not to mention O'Halloran and Romero - it's easy to think having LaRussa's attitude there could make things toxic if things go sideways. Like, why would you want this guy in your organization as a one-of-many "advisor"? deadspin.com/tony-la-russa-invades-pirates-broadcast-booth-during-ga-1778900260He was a good manager, but an extraordinarily bad executive, both as a talent evaluator and in terms of the temperament necessary to do the job well. He's the worst person possible for the job he is apparently getting. Translation: "Great baseball man." Cafardo will be elated. Exactly. Nick Cafardo will be ecstatic. The grownups are now all in the room. I really miss the days when there were young innovative executives on the Red Sox who were trying to discover new advantages and be ahead of the curve. The Red Sox talk about analytics but I wonder where they truly are with that compared to the rest of the league. Granted in the beginning of the Theo era most teams were old school and didn't utilize analytics as much in their decision making processes, but I have trouble believing that the Sox are as up to snuff as other teams now. And how far could they go if Wren and LaRussa are the most trusted advisors to Dombrowski who's more of a dictator than a collaborator? I guess Jim Leyland wasn't available to manager or advise in the front office? I could be wrong, but it doesn't feel that way anymore. Not that veteran baseball men don't have anything useful to contribute - they certainly do, some more than others, it's disconcerting to see the Red Sox fall behind the curve, or at least that's what I think. I see a team that's got about two or three years left in the window and a lot of murkiness thereafter. I look at the farm system and I don't see any elite talent. Groome is somebody who could turn out to be a top of the rotation starter. I like Chavis as a regular and I'm bullish about Josh Ockimey (more so than Travis). I think Mata can be a mid to back end starter and am very intrigued with Daniel Flores who is a long, long way off. Dalbec might have a bit of a future or might wind up striking out way too much for it to matter. But I don't see much depth or as much upside as we've seen in the past, and I hope it changes soon or the Sox could be in for a rude awakening with a bloated payroll and little ready in the farm to take over and impact.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Nov 2, 2017 13:28:34 GMT -5
Disgusted by this move. I don't care to know the reason why. Darn near my least favorite non MFY of all time.
add:. I think he is buddies with dick Cheney, Bobby Knight and Bill Parcells....excuse me while I go vomit.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Nov 2, 2017 14:10:55 GMT -5
What a front office is responsible for and what a coaching staff is responsible for has very little overlap. LaRussa strikes me as someone who is very good at one and not the other. Why? He did a bad job with the Diamondbacks, but he was probably way over his head. In a more controlled environment where he's further down the hierarchy chain, I think he could work. He was very good at what he did for a very long time, he could contribute stuff and if he doesn't who cares anyway he likely won't have any real power. It kind of reminds me of Phil Jackson. He was terrible as the head of FO, but if you hire him as an advisor of sorts? IMO that's not a bad gamble if he's not repeating the role he was bad at.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 2, 2017 14:39:57 GMT -5
What would he contribute? Honest question. In terms of player evaluation, he's not going to be able to see these guys up close like he did as a manager and I'm skeptical that he's going to put in the time to properly scout guys in-person or on video. Even as a manager, he was often criticized for over-relying on gritty veterans and small sample size matchup stats (sound familiar?). He's certainly fallen well behind the curve in terms of understanding player value. If he's just going to contribute off-the-cuff opinions, not sure that's really valuable.
For what it's worth, I wouldn't want Phil Jackson advising my basketball front office, either.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 2, 2017 14:56:24 GMT -5
So what if La Russa's role is to be a sounding board for Cora? You can't really hire La Russa as a bench coach, but what if they though, hm, we have a rookie manager, why not bring in the guy with the third-most wins by a manager ever to be a resource whenever Cora wants him?
Easier to swallow, no?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 2, 2017 15:11:03 GMT -5
I hope La Russa's role is getting the league to go easy on punishing the Red Sox and that's about it.
|
|
|