USSMariner looks at the different organizations and ranks them on front office cohesiveness and success, and the Cardinals rank very close to the bottom of the list at #27. This is not surprising given the current situation surrounding Walt Jocketty’s termination and the overall lack of player development over the past few years. That is on the upswing with Luhnow at the helm of that particular area, and while we do have our disagreements with some of his methods, overall I feel he has a good mix of “Moneyball” skills along with trust in scout’s opinions. The opening of academies in Latin America should be a huge boost over the next few years. While our argument lies with some of the draft picks, I credit Luhnow for thinking outside of the box in his overall approach to player development.
Right now the current search for a GM is pivotal. With available news of new school thinkers available in Antonetti and Woodfork, the future could be bright. Those are two GM’s who would mesh very well with Luhnow, who is cut from a similar cloth. They would also fit well with DeWitt, who wants to win with a sensibly sized payroll. But word from Bernie Miklasz is that Bill DeWitt is consulting with Tony La Russa on who he would feel comfortable with as GM in hopes to woo him back. This is so backwards. La Russa was firmly in the same divisive camp of Jocketty, and hates the “Moneyball” school of thought. Once considered a cutting edge type of manager, La Russa is now a crotchety dinosaur with died in the wool old school philosophies that are going to perpetuate the disintegration of the team. I understand why DeWitt is listening to La Russa and would seek his input, La Russa is one of the winningest managers in the history of the game and for the most part, the fans love him. Maybe he fears backlash from fans if he doesn’t win him back, I fear the backlash of what will happen if they do bring him back. If he has input on who is hired as the GM, you can bet it isn’t Antonetti and Woodfork, who have both been pivotal to the success of two young teams we currently see in the playoffs. Tony would probably recommend someone like himself, someone like Jocketty, and then you have the continuation of this whole stupid feud. Why go back to square one?
Or maybe he’d recommend John Mozeliak. I used to think Mozeliak would be a good blend of the old and the new, but I’m not so sure now. I like Russ Springer and all, but $3.5 million for a 39-year-old middle reliever isn’t the wisest investment. Netting some choice draft picks is more sensible, especially from one saying they are committing to building from within. Exercising the $8 million option on Jason Isringhausen isn’t terrible if the team plans to contend now, but he thinks the team will compete then he obviously hasn’t looked at the state of his own team. With the usually accurate ZiPS projections being released this past week, it’s easy to envision another season of turmoil and recognize the need to rebuild. Patch job signings won’t likely make this team a contender, IMO.
Listening to La Russa on who should be GM is a horrid idea. La Russa and Jocketty came in and revived a fledgling organization. It’s easy to want to build a monument for them, to keep trying to live by their philosophies because of what they did in the past. But that isn’t the direction winning baseball is going today. Honoring the past shouldn’t be above winning.
Filed under: Uncategorized
erik
azruavatar
fewgoodcards
roarke49
theredbaaron
Is opening academies in LAtin America thinking outside the box? Seems more like just getting in the game.
Despite the recent upheavel, I think the team did have cohesion in its organization. Draft cheaply, have ptichers in the minors pitch to contact, develop enough talent to trade away for higher priced veterans, produce some surprises (Duncan, etc.) to help fill in the holes, try to catch fire with a minor league free agent or two. It has been an expensive way to operate but it hasn’t worked that badly.
I’m with Carioca here.
I don’t have any inside information (I may even have less outside information than you guys), but in all the upheaval I’m not getting the impression that Tony was the problem.
I know that could just be spin to cover his return, but let’s look at it through DeWitt’s eyes:
* He made a decision to go a different direction with the team. You can go back to the 2000 draft and see that he stopped taking above-slot risks with draft picks, which indicates to me a loss of confidence in player development within his organization. It’s not unreasonable to assume he was by that point pushing Walt to start spending more wisely in that area.
* Moneyball came out in 2003, and we’ve been told it made a big impression on DeWitt.
* Luhnow was brought aboard in 2004, and the scouting department was reorganized.
* In 2006 (I think) he promoted Luhnow over one of Jocketty’s guys, and a cold war began.
* By 2007, Jocketty seemed to be in open rebellion. Despite a fluke World Series win, he seemed paralyzed as a GM. He hadn’t made a major trade since the Mulder fiasco, and instead seemed focused on using the media to make the case that he was underpaid and underappreciated.
* In any business, you fire a guy like that, and DeWitt seems to have handled it as well as it could be handled — you do it fast and do it clean, and don’t give anybody the “it’s not you, it’s me” BS. He told Jocketty: “It’s you.”
Now, most of us, including me, have assumed that TLR was in the middle of all this on Jocketty’s side.
But if he wants to come back and DeWitt wants him back, that suggests to me that Tony wasn’t part of Walt’s pity party.
My big point, though, is that DeWitt must be making his intentions clear to La Russa, and La Russa must be on board with the shift toward internal player development and away from aging veterans.
Does it make sense that DeWitt would fire his GM for his failure to adapt to the organization’s new direction, but then reward his manager for the exact same offense? DeWitt has already bitten the bullet on Jocketty; he could’ve easily let La Russa go if he thought Tony was part of the problem, and the heat wouldn’t be appreciably worse.
That’s why, to me, it looks like the owner and manager are on the same page, and that the future GM will be someone who’s comfortable with both of them.
scout.com (http://stlcardinals.scout.com/a.z?s=321&p=2&c=689955&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fstlcardinals.scout.com%2f2%2f689955.html) is reporting the Branyan deal is complete, you can sign up for a 7 day free trial to read more of the article but I heard rumors that it is only Cash and not a real player.
latin america is hardly outside of the box thinking. i’m just talking about his overall approach isn’t old school. and while it may not have worked out badly the past decade, it’s heading south fairly quickly
Resigning Springer doesn’t upset me because it doesn’t block anyone and helps to retain one of our very few strengths. Springer put up good numbers in 07.
If we resign Eck, I am going to be pissed. Unlike Springer he is blocking several diffrent prospects who can probably already out perform him in 08
I don’t see a need to complain about 1yr contract for stopgaps when we don’t have in house replacements handy. However, if we do have equal or better young talent then it makes no sense to sign a FA. See: Ponson, Eck, Juan
Mazzone’s out in Baltimore. The intriguing replacement options are piling up. I would personally love to see what Mazzone could do with Anthony Reyes…
DriverZn, I disagree. Springer potentially blocks Perez and/or Motte. While $3.5 million isn’t a lot these days, let’s not forget that its 1/2 of what it would have taken to sign Porcello.
We have multiple prospects who are likely to outperform Eck in 2008?
The Cardinals do?
Who are they?
Ryan, Hoff, Barden I suspect could all outperform Eck in 08.